Is remarriage after divorce a sin in some Fundamentalist/Evangelical churches?

[Jesuspaiditall]

In a different thread, a poster said, in response to my comment that, to my knowledge, Fundamentalists/Evangelical churches did not consider remarriage after divorce to be a sin:

My understanding was that the Catholic Church was the only one that considered remarriage after divorce (without obtaining an annulment) was a sin. I know of no Fundamentalist/Evangelical church that teachings it is a sin to either (a) obtain a civil divorce and/or (b) remarry after a divorce.

(Note that (a) is not in and of itself a sin in the Catholic faith; it may sometimes be licit to obtain a civil divorce for the purposes of custody, property division, and/or safety of the spouse/children; however, the sin comes in believing that civil divorce dissolves a sacramental and/or valid marriage bond, which it does not.)

Thoughts?

Divorce itself is a sin. So marriage after divorce is a sin.(Matt 5:32, 1 Cor 7:10-11)

 

[Pinkyyy]

In a different thread, a poster said, in response to my comment that, to my knowledge, Fundamentalists/Evangelical churches did not consider remarriage after divorce to be a sin:

My understanding was that the Catholic Church was the only one that considered remarriage after divorce (without obtaining an annulment) was a sin. I know of no Fundamentalist/Evangelical church that teachings it is a sin to either (a) obtain a civil divorce and/or (b) remarry after a divorce.

(Note that (a) is not in and of itself a sin in the Catholic faith; it may sometimes be licit to obtain a civil divorce for the purposes of custody, property division, and/or safety of the spouse/children; however, the sin comes in believing that civil divorce dissolves a sacramental and/or valid marriage bond, which it does not.)

Thoughts?

Here are my thoughts. Yes, it is a common believe for some protestants that remarriage and divorce are not sins. This is not how I view it though. I differ with both Catholics and Protestants

I believe that when you marry (assuming here both are Christians) it should be for life. I do not accept this it has to be in this or that church to be valid. As long as it’s between 2 christians (hetero, before anyone jumps in with a comment), and they know the important of marriage in it’s Christian setting, then they should make every effort to make it work for life.

Now, there are exceptions I believe. Cheating for one. The innocent spouse should not be held to a cheating spouse. They should be able to remarry. I feel that the cheater should not.

Abuse - innocent one should be able to divorce and remarry. The abuser, no should not be able to remarry, but I don’t have a problem if they start a divorce - they don’t deserve the other person anyway.

Also, if one spouse leaves the marriage, the one that does not want to disolve it, if they chose to later, they should be able to remarry. Again, not the one that left.

Now, if one just leaves for the heck of it, and was never serious about the “till death do us part” then they should try to work it out anymore (especially if there are kids) and if they can’t and they leave again, the innocent one should be able to remarry again.

I do not believe in these annulments. I think often times they are used as an excuse.

 

[Pinkyyy]

lets see what the bible said about the subject.

Gen 2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

Mat 19:3 The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?
Mat 19:5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?
Mat 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.

Jam 4:17 Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth [it] not, to him it is sin.

Who cares what you denomination said or your church. What does GOD say.

I agree with this but you are leaving out the part about an unbelieving spouse. Also, this is where I differ from the CC church - I don’t see anywhere where the bible says what is a “real” marriage. Getting an annulment is like a way for RCC to “find a loop hole” in what you quote above from the Bible - their own reason for divorce when Jesus does not speak of this. I do not believe the CC can add things in because it “doesn’t make sense otherwise”.

If you are in a marriage, you are in a MARRIAGE - JMO. Also, what about abusive partners? I mean, I doubt God wants someone to stay with an abusive spouse. The protestant point is this - God says he forgives. People make mistakes. They should try their best, but sometimes they fail. The innocent ones then should be able to remarry.

 

[Pinkyyy]

.
In most other instances, neither party may remarry, unless it is to each other. (If they divorce a second (¿third?) time, they may not marry anybody, including each other.)

jonathon

Maybe I am not understanding you correctly. If you divorce and remarry and the second marriage is not valid, why can you not remarry your first spouse since you would be married to them still in God’s eyes?

Also, if you divorce and your spouse remarries, then why are you not free to marry again as the spouse is “cheating”? You then have a valid reason to end the marriage (different from the legal term divorce) and remarry.

Catholics, can you explain the following to me as I have always been confused about it.

I know a couple who had been married for probably 25-30 years (maybe even longer). After 5 kids, he cheated and left. They somehow got an annulment (beyond me, but not the subject). Later, of course he realized he was a moron and wanted to remarry his wife (neither had been married to anyone else but eachother) and the church DENIED them? I don’t get it. If they were annuled and they should be able to mary eachother as they are not bound to the first marriage (never happend) and even if in the event they weren’t annuled, according to the church they are still marrried in God’s eyes. Can someone help me out on this one?

 

[jblake]

Pinkyyy;:

As long as it’s between 2 christians (hetero, before anyone jumps in with a comment), and they know the important of marriage in it’s Christian setting, then they should make every effort to make it work for life.

A few days ago I read a 19th century diatribe about “marriage is between one man and one woman.” (The emphasis was in the original.) It cited umpteen verses to support that statement. However, it was only in the final paragraph that it explicitly stated what it was opposing — polygamy.

Now, there are exceptions I believe.

The problem with allowing for exceptions, is defining exactly what those exceptions are:

• Is it “cheating” for a partner to look at the Playboy/On our Backs/Playgirl/Blueboy centerfold? (OK, the “On Our Backs” centerfold was usually poetry, rather than photography.);
• Is it “abuse” for one partner to refuse to have sex with the other partner?
• Is it “abuse” for one partner to prohibit the other partner to go out with their friends?

Now, if one just leaves for the heck of it, and was never serious about the “till death do us part” then they should try to work it out anymore

Divorce occurs because the partners did not communicate with each other.

 

[jblake]

Pinkyyy;:

Maybe I am not understanding you correctly. If you divorce and remarry and the second marriage is not valid, why can you not remarry your first spouse since you would be married to them still in God’s eyes?

I’ll rephrase what I wrote.

• John has a torrid affair with Jane;
• Mary stays at home by herself;
  If John and Mary get divorced, then Mary can remarry. John, however, may not remarry.

If John and Mary divorced for other reasons then:

• John and Mary may not marry anybody else. They may marry each other, for a “second time”;
  If John and Mary divorce each other a second time, then neither Jane nor Mary may marry anybody;

Unfortunately, my computer is still dysfunctional, so I don’t have access to my notes on this topic.

Also, if you divorce and your spouse remarries, then why are you not free to marry again as the spouse is “cheating”? You then have a valid reason to end the marriage (different from the legal term divorce) and remarry.

If the reason for the divorce was anything other than adultery, then , if either party marries, they commit adultery. If the reason for the divorce was adultery, then the spouse that did not commit adultery may remarry. The spouse who committed adultery may not marry anybody.

I know a couple who had been married for probably 25-30 years … he cheated and left … got an annulment … wanted to remarry his wife … and the church DENIED them?

From the perspective of Scriptura Sola, because he was not faithful to his wife, he may not marry anybody.

My guess is that when the couple requested remarriage, the Priest came to one of the following conclusions:

• The annulment was void, and the couple was, in the eyes of the Church, still married;
• The annulment was void, but the couple was, in the eyes of the Church, legitimately divorced;
• If the couple were to get married, the annulment would be voided;
• The marriage would be void;

The last one is the most probable. The most important factors in determining whether or not a marriage can be annulled are:

• Was the ceremony in accordance with Canon law?
• Were the parties free to marry each other?
• Did each partner intend to adhere to the biblical commandments and expectations relating to marriage?
• Is each partner physically able to live according to the marriage commitments?
• Is each partner psychologically able to live according to the marriage commitments?

If the male spouse had premarital sex with any woman, and after his marriage, continued to have sex with women other than his spouse, then he demonstrated that he was not psychologically able to live according to the marriage commitments.

Since the male spouse has a history showing that he is not able to live according to the commitments of marriage, to allow him to marry anybody, granting him the right to re-marry is akin to endorsing a marriage that is celebrated in violation of Canon Law.

If they were annulled and they should be able to marry each other

Annulments don’t grant what one normally thinks that they grant.

xan

jonathon

 

[kimmielittle]

http://forums.catholic-questions.org/picture.php?albumid=1072&pictureid=9997

adherents.com/largecom/baptist_divorce.html

 

[The_Wizard]

Maybe I am not understanding you correctly. If you divorce and remarry and the second marriage is not valid, why can you not remarry your first spouse since you would be married to them still in God’s eyes?

Also, if you divorce and your spouse remarries, then why are you not free to marry again as the spouse is “cheating”? You then have a valid reason to end the marriage (different from the legal term divorce) and remarry.

Catholics, can you explain the following to me as I have always been confused about it.

I know a couple who had been married for probably 25-30 years (maybe even longer). After 5 kids, he cheated and left. They somehow got an annulment (beyond me, but not the subject). Later, of course he realized he was a moron and wanted to remarry his wife (neither had been married to anyone else but eachother) and the church DENIED them? I don’t get it. If they were annuled and they should be able to mary eachother as they are not bound to the first marriage (never happend) and even if in the event they weren’t annuled, according to the church they are still marrried in God’s eyes. Can someone help me out on this one?

Inorder to get an annulnment within The Church specific reasons must be shown as to have pervented a “true” marriage. Some of those reasons are: at the time of the marriage one or both parties did not intend the marriage to last forever or one or both paarties reserved the right to have other sexual partners or one or both parties decided not to have childern. There are about 12 possible reasons why a marriage might be invalid. Now if The Church comes to the conclusion that the reason for the annulnment still exsist or that some other reason is present that would make the marriage invalid It would have to say no to them. Maybe the guy still thought he could foul around. I am not good at explaining thing in writting but maybe someone can pick up where I left off. Remmember, you only have their side of the story.

 

[FabiusMaximus]

Our old church in Italy explicitly rejected divorce, and whoever divorced would probably receive glares and stares (at the very least).

Our last church here was pretty open to it. The pastor would mention he was against divorce, but never really talked much on it. There were a slew of divorced and remarried couples. I’d say it depends on the individual church and denomination.

 

[ltwin]

Among Pentecostals, there tends to be two standards: one for ministers and one for laypeople. A man (or woman since most Pentecostals ordain women) will be denied ordination with a denomination if he is divorced or is married to a spouse who has been divorced. This is based on 1 Timothy 3:2.

For laypeople, it depends on what type of Pentecostal church they go to. Divorce is universally considered a sin, but its not considered an unpardonable sin. A person may be able to remarry and may not. There is no formal process. It’s all pretty ad hoc.

 

[Newsy]

Here are my thoughts. Yes, it is a common believe for some protestants that remarriage and divorce are not sins. This is not how I view it though. I differ with both Catholics and Protestants

I believe that when you marry (assuming here both are Christians) it should be for life. I do not accept this it has to be in this or that church to be valid. As long as it’s between 2 christians (hetero, before anyone jumps in with a comment), and they know the important of marriage in it’s Christian setting, then they should make every effort to make it work for life.

Now, there are exceptions I believe. Cheating for one. The innocent spouse should not be held to a cheating spouse. They should be able to remarry. I feel that the cheater should not.

Abuse - innocent one should be able to divorce and remarry. The abuser, no should not be able to remarry, but I don’t have a problem if they start a divorce - they don’t deserve the other person anyway.

Also, if one spouse leaves the marriage, the one that does not want to disolve it, if they chose to later, they should be able to remarry. Again, not the one that left.

Now, if one just leaves for the heck of it, and was never serious about the “till death do us part” then they should try to work it out anymore (especially if there are kids) and if they can’t and they leave again, the innocent one should be able to remarry again.

I do not believe in these annulments. I think often times they are used as an excuse.

Funny, most of your reasons for divorce are in line with the Catholic Church. Abuse, child safety or divorced by spouse who cheats are all reasons to have the validity of the marriage questioned. If there are “terms” to get divorced on, there needs to be a third party to investigate the original marriage.

When I was in a protestant church, there were people who were advised to get divorced by the pastor. This was not uncommon in many churches in the area. There didn’t seem to be very many who held to the sanctity of marriage, but marriage was never considered a sacrament there anyway. Scary how much society has changed some churches, instead of churches changing the society.