If you get a divorce, then remarry-is that adultery? seriously?

[whatevergirl]

My husband and I were talking about this a few mornings ago, on the way in to work together. He feels that when Jesus spoke about divorce, He meant that if you divorced, you’re committing a mortal sin. I said, no, I think if you get married without an annulment, after you divorce (legally), then you are committing adultery.

I am also a bit confused on what Jesus meant. Did Jesus seriously mean that if we get divorced, and remarry, then we are committing adultery?? (thus, a mortal sin)

I mean…my gosh, I have so many family members and friends who are divorced (no annulments) and are remarried…most have left the faith…what about them?

Just thought I’d ask…

 

[Dan_Grelinger]

Civil divorce may or may not be a sin, and may or may not be a mortal sin, depending on circumstances.

Attempting to marry again, when one has already entered into a valid marriage, is almost always a mortal sin. (Only one exception that I know of, and is very restrictive).

There are many examples of Christ and the prophets lamenting that many are called, but few are chosen. Hopefully people will truly repent of their sins before they die.

Dan

 

[whatevergirl]

Thanks, Dan…I ask because I just can’t imagine so many goodhearted Christians, who have come out of some bad relationships…being ‘punished’ by God, for marrying another? Not for me to judge…I’m just merely stating a thought that runs through my mind, when I think of my friends who have divorced, and remarried…not advocating divorce either…let me preface with that! But, just that I’ve always wondered what Jesus fully meant when He discussed the topic of divorce with his audience.

Some of my friends’ marriages, I would imagine, would be considered valid marriages in the eyes of the RCC. So, if they were valid, would the RCC not grant them an annulment?

 

[SMHW]

My husband and I were talking about this a few mornings ago, on the way in to work together. He feels that when Jesus spoke about divorce, He meant that if you divorced, you’re committing a mortal sin. I said, no, I think if you get married without an annulment, after you divorce (legally), then you are committing adultery.

I am also a bit confused on what Jesus meant. Did Jesus seriously mean that if we get divorced, and remarry, then we are committing adultery?? (thus, a mortal sin)

I mean…my gosh, I have so many family members and friends who are divorced (no annulments) and are remarried…most have left the faith…what about them?

Just thought I’d ask…

What Jesus pretty much meant is that from God’s perspective there is no such thing as divorce. Marriage is divinely instituted. Divorce is a human invention. Therefore if someone ‘divorces’ and remarries then the new couple are committing adultery because at least one of them is actually married to another person. The only ‘exception’ Jesus allowed was in the case of what is commonly translated as ‘adultery’ but really means an invalidly contracted marriage. In other words, if you marry invalidly you can divorce that person …because from God’s perspective you were never married anyways. This is not just true for Catholics or Christians. It’s true for all people. (But for non-Christians marriage is not sacramental.)

I believe a non-Catholic has the right to obtain a ruling of nullity from the Catholic Church. But it probably wouldn’t occur to most non-Catholics to do so.

As far as it being a sin to divorce (but not remarry) that would depend on the circumstances. Breaking up a valid marriage is a serious matter and could be sinful. But often one spouse is an innocent victim of the other’s desire for a divorce and so would not be sinning. But again, circumstances are the key in this case.

 

[Dan_Grelinger]

Some of my friends’ marriages, I would imagine, would be considered valid marriages in the eyes of the RCC. So, if they were valid, would the RCC not grant them an annulment?

The question is not phrased in a way that it can be answered, sorry. No one ‘grants’ annulments. Please allow me to rephrase it to what I think you are asking.

“If a couple’s marriage is valid, will the RCC find that their marriage is not valid?” The answer is “Hopefully not”. The marriage tribunals are trying to figure out if the couple successfully married. If they did, there is precious little the Catholic Church (or anyone else) can do about it. “What God has joined together, let no man put asunder”. It would be grave sin to tell a couple they weren’t really married when they were, allowing their attempted remarriage and subsequent adultry.

Dan

 

[Dan_Grelinger]

I believe a non-Catholic has the right to obtain a ruling of nullity from the Catholic Church. But it probably wouldn’t occur to most non-Catholics to do so.

I think I know what you mean. You don’t mean that they have a right to obtain a ruling of nullity, even if the Church determines their marriage to be valid, do you?

You mean that they have the right to petition a ruling on the validity of their marriage, right?

Dan

 

[otjm]

The question is not phrased in a way that it can be answered, sorry. No one ‘grants’ annulments. Please allow me to rephrase it to what I think you are asking.

“If a couple’s marriage is valid, will the RCC find that their marriage is not valid?” The answer is “Hopefully not”. The marriage tribunals are trying to figure out if the couple successfully married. If they did, there is precious little the Catholic Church (or anyone else) can do about it. “What God has joined together, let no man put asunder”. It would be grave sin to tell a couple they weren’t really married when they were, allowing their attempted remarriage and subsequent adultry.

Dan

To carry Dan’s comments further, while the great majority of cases that make it to a decision in the tribunal are granted a decree of nullity, that does not account for the cases that never make it to the tribunal because there are no grounds for a decree of nullity, and does not account for those cases that are either withdrawn or dropped after being sent to the tribunal, without a decision being rendered. In short, there is no automatic assumption that a decree of nullity will be granted after a divorce.

If one remarries without a decree of nullity, the Church considers the first marriage binding never mind that the State does not, and the one remarrying would be committing adultery.

As to the morality concerning getting a divorce, one cannot assume that because the two cannot or will not get along, that such fact is indicative that they would be given a decree of nullity. Issues that arise after the wedding day are not grounds for a decree of nullity; whatever the decree is based on had to exist ion the day of the marriage. The one who causes the marriage to break up may be causing the divorce of a valid, non-nullible marriage. and that implies moral guilt.

So, in short, depending on who gets or causes the divorce may have some moral responsibilites which could be lesser sin or greater sin, depending. That ultimately is an issue for the confessor.

 

[1ke]

My husband and I were talking about this a few mornings ago, on the way in to work together. He feels that when Jesus spoke about divorce, He meant that if you divorced, you’re committing a mortal sin. I said, no, I think if you get married without an annulment, after you divorce (legally), then you are committing adultery.

Yes, divorce is gravely wrong. From the Catechism (emphasis mine):

2382 The Lord Jesus insisted on the original intention of the Creator who willed that marriage be indissoluble. He abrogates the accommodations that had slipped into the old Law.

Between the baptized, “a ratified and consummated marriage cannot be dissolved by any human power or for any reason other than death.”

2383 The separation of spouses while maintaining the marriage bond can be legitimate in certain cases provided for by canon law.

If civil divorce remains the **only possible way **of ensuring certain legal rights, the care of the children, or the protection of inheritance, **it can be tolerated and does not constitute a moral offense. **

2384 Divorce is a grave offense against the natural law. It claims to break the contract, to which the spouses freely consented, to live with each other till death. Divorce does injury to the covenant of salvation, of which sacramental marriage is the sign. **Contracting a new union, even if it is recognized by civil law, adds to the gravity of the rupture: the remarried spouse is then in a situation of public and permanent adultery: **
If a husband, separated from his wife, approaches another woman, he is an adulterer because he makes that woman commit adultery, and the woman who lives with him is an adulteress, because she has drawn another’s husband to herself.

2385 Divorce is immoral also because it introduces disorder into the family and into society. This disorder brings grave harm to the deserted spouse, to children traumatized by the separation of their parents and often torn between them, and because of its contagious effect which makes it truly a plague on society.

2386 It can happen that one of the spouses is the innocent victim of a divorce decreed by civil law; this spouse therefore has not contravened the moral law. There is a considerable difference between a spouse who has sincerely tried to be faithful to the sacrament of marriage and is unjustly abandoned, and one who through his own grave fault destroys a canonically valid marriage.

I am also a bit confused on what Jesus meant. Did Jesus seriously mean that if we get divorced, and remarry, then we are committing adultery?? (thus, a mortal sin)

Yes. He did.

Again, see the Catechism: **Contracting a new union, even if it is recognized by civil law, adds to the gravity of the rupture: the remarried spouse is then in a situation of public and permanent adultery: **

I mean…my gosh, I have so many family members and friends who are divorced (no annulments) and are remarried…most have left the faith…what about them?

Yep. It’s unfortunate so many people abandon the faith and ignore the teaching of Christ on marriage. Yes, they are committing a gravely immoral action, and depending on their knowledge and free will could also be sinning mortally.

 

[1ke]

I just can’t imagine so many goodhearted Christians, who have come out of some bad relationships…being ‘punished’ by God, for marrying another?

Everyone is responsible for their actions. People choose to go against God’s law. They have the option of remaining single.

But, just that I’ve always wondered what Jesus fully meant when He discussed the topic of divorce with his audience.

We don’t have to wonder. Jesus was very clear, and so is the Catechism.

Some of my friends’ marriages, I would imagine, would be considered valid marriages in the eyes of the RCC. So, if they were valid, would the RCC not grant them an annulment?

A valid marriage cannot be dissolved by any person or power but death.

 

[MelanieAnne]

If someone has been married and divorced and then remarries (presumably NOT the same person they were originally married to!) and then wishes to be received into full communion with the Catholic Church they would need to submit their first marriage to the tribunal and seek to obtain a “Decree of Nullity”. Until they receive the Decree of Nullity, they cannot even enter into the Rite of Acceptance/Rite of Welcome, they remain in the “inquiry” stage, at least that is the information we have received in our Diocese.

In my RCIA class there were two of us who had been married and divorced. One of us had remarried, the other (me) had not. The woman that had remarried could not participate in any Rite of the Church until the Decree of Nullity from her first marriage had been obtained. Since I had not remarried, it was OK for me to proceed. But even so, I would not be permitted to remarry in or out of the Church without first receiving the Decree of Nullity for my first marriage. To marry before that, even civilly, would make me ineligible for the Eucharist.

The tribunals can take months, and there is no guarantee as to the outcome, so this process can slow down your progress towards full communion. Before you obtain the Decree of Nullity, in the eyes of the Church you are committing adultery if you have remarried or if you are living with someone but are not married.

I believe that this position on the part of the Church, while it may seem harsh, is in accordance with the Bible and is meant to show the importance the Church places on marital vows. It is not meant to “punish” those who left bad relationships at all, even if it may seem that way. Instead, I believe it is meant to demonstrate that perhaps we should ALL consider entering into a marital relationship with a bit more thought, consideration and sober reflection. Had most of us done that, we wouldn’t have made those bad marriages in the first place.

And the term “annulment” has no meaning in the Church. An “annulment” is a secular legal term. When submitting a petition to the tribunal to clear a previous marriage you are seeking a “Decree of Nullity” not an “Annulment”. A subtle difference, perhaps, but a real one. You are not seeking to show that your marriage was null and void and never actually existed. You are seeking to demonstrate that the relationship was not binding before God because of some critical defect. It’s a complicated process, but ultimately, if you receive approval for your petition, a liberating one.

 

[SMHW]

I think I know what you mean. You don’t mean that they have a right to obtain a ruling of nullity, even if the Church determines their marriage to be valid, do you?

You mean that they have the right to petition a ruling on the validity of their marriage, right?

Yes. That’s what I meant. I meant such a person had the right to petition for a ruling, not a an automatic right to a ruling of nullity.

 

[LilyM]

My husband and I were talking about this a few mornings ago, on the way in to work together. He feels that when Jesus spoke about divorce, He meant that if you divorced, you’re committing a mortal sin. I said, no, I think if you get married without an annulment, after you divorce (legally), then you are committing adultery.

I am also a bit confused on what Jesus meant. Did Jesus seriously mean that if we get divorced, and remarry, then we are committing adultery?? (thus, a mortal sin)

I mean…my gosh, I have so many family members and friends who are divorced (no annulments) and are remarried…most have left the faith…what about them?

Just thought I’d ask…

You’re both kinda right. There are only limited circumstances where the Church concedes the necessity of a civil divorce for legal reasons, these have been stated already. Civil separation is usually sufficient. Which is not the same thing as the sacramental bonds of marriage being broken between the couple - there’s no such thing as a Church divorce.

The reason for this is that it is a sacrament. Essentially there are THREE partners in each Catholic marriage - the couple and God. For either husband or wife to attempt to marry another than their validly married spouse is infidelity to that third party, and yes, grave matter, potentially adultery (a mortal sin). Christ makes it pretty clear.

If the marriage is declared null (in other words that it never was valid) then the partners may remarry within the church. They didn’t validly contract the sacramental bond in the first place, so they are free.

Your family and friends would need to annul their first marriages, if possible, or leave their current spouses, and return to the church.

 

[puzzleannie]

My husband and I were talking about this a few mornings ago, on the way in to work together. He feels that when Jesus spoke about divorce, He meant that if you divorced, you’re committing a mortal sin. I said, no, I think if you get married without an annulment, after you divorce (legally), then you are committing adultery.

I am also a bit confused on what Jesus meant. Did Jesus seriously mean that if we get divorced, and remarry, then we are committing adultery?? (thus, a mortal sin)

I mean…my gosh, I have so many family members and friends who are divorced (no annulments) and are remarried…most have left the faith…what about them?

Just thought I’d ask…

Jesus clearly said that “remarriage” after divorce is adultery no ifs ands or buts. The CAtholic church offers the protection of canon law to its members so that if their marriage is invalid they have a remedy. A decree of nullity (there is no such thing as an annulment) is a canon law judgement that no valid marriage ever existed, because the conditions necessary were not present at the time of the marriage. It is NOT a divorce, although a civil divorce may be allowable and necessary to comply with civil law and to insure rights of spouses and children.

As for people who know who have divorced and remarried, we cannot judge individuals but we can judge actions, and objectively, to do so is to commit adultery. We do not know all the circumstances about another’s marital situation, so in charity we do not judge without all the facts.

No, goodhearted people in this situation will not be punished by God, they will be punished by their own choices and the consequences of those choices. The punishment is inherent in the choice, especially the worst and most damaging choice, voluntary separation from God and from the Church.

 

[Malcolm_McLean]

Jesus clearly said that “remarriage” after divorce is adultery no ifs ands or buts. .

I can’t speak Greek, but the Catholic translation says, “I am not speaking here of fornication” with the understanding that pre-martial sex is not marriage.
That makes obvious sense, otherwise anyone could eye up a rich and attractive target, get them drunk, and then claim marriage rights. It would be an open invitation to abuse.
Howwever Protestants have often interpreted the verse as meaning “fornication dissolves the marriage”. That is, divorce is permitted on this ground alone, but not for unreasonable behaviour or desertion or incompatibility.

 

[jmcrae]

I mean…my gosh, I have so many family members and friends who are divorced (no annulments) and are remarried…most have left the faith…what about them?

The children at Fatima told us that they saw souls falling into Hell like snowflakes in a December blizzard. Clearly, then, not everyone gets to go to Heaven.

This was in the summer of 1917, before we even had such prevalent social sins as divorce, homosexuality, serial divorce and remarriage, birth control, etc. The situation must be even worse today than it was then, I should think.

Many of those who go to Hell will be people that we know and love. This should not surprise us.

 

[whatevergirl]

Wow…I posted this last night, and was happy to see the replies…thanks everyone. I want to reply individually, because everyone’s time to answer this is appreciated.

In a nutshell though, I knew that Jesus was rather blunt about divorce, etc…, but knowing my sister is living in mortal sin – her divorce, her living with another man, her unwillingness to get an annulment…is an unfortunate, to say the least, place for her sould to be.

 

[seaseadisney]

the statement about remarriage being adulterous seems clear to me in the Bible (New Testament). It is so depressingly sad to me this Saturday evening as I sit alone. My husband left me 20 months ago and has refused counseling. He dropped me completely out of his life. We did have a lot of problems and were getting away from the sacramental form of marriage.

The fact that I am looking at the rest of my life without human sexual love is sad.

 

[lizaanne]

the statement about remarriage being adulterous seems clear to me in the Bible (New Testament). It is so depressingly sad to me this Saturday evening as I sit alone. My husband left me 20 months ago and has refused counseling. He dropped me completely out of his life. We did have a lot of problems and were getting away from the sacramental form of marriage.

The fact that I am looking at the rest of my life without human sexual love is sad.

I am so sorry for you in your situation. I’ll keep you in my prayers and hope that things work out for you.

~Liza

 

[whatevergirl]

the statement about remarriage being adulterous seems clear to me in the Bible (New Testament). It is so depressingly sad to me this Saturday evening as I sit alone. My husband left me 20 months ago and has refused counseling. He dropped me completely out of his life. We did have a lot of problems and were getting away from the sacramental form of marriage.

The fact that I am looking at the rest of my life without human sexual love is sad.

ugh, your post touched me. I will pray for you–that you find comfort and healing…and also that God will place someone special in your life to love…and who will love you.

 

[BobP123]

the statement about remarriage being adulterous seems clear to me in the Bible (New Testament). It is so depressingly sad to me this Saturday evening as I sit alone. My husband left me 20 months ago and has refused counseling. He dropped me completely out of his life. We did have a lot of problems and were getting away from the sacramental form of marriage.

The fact that I am looking at the rest of my life without human sexual love is sad.

Yes it’s sad and I know this may be of little consolation but do realize that they’re a lot of us in that same situation. Know too that they’re plenty of support groups, same may be as close as your local parish. I don’t think God intended for you to be alone.

God bless and let’s say a prayer for each other.