Jesus recommends divorce?

[jmcrae]

I would disagree with you. I can give you 2 examples where money spoke within the RCC on this very issue. We had very wealthy friends who were able to get an annulment within like 6 months. They paid $6000.00. Then still another waited over 2 years. And guess what. Both annulments were based on the same thing.

Money “greases the wheels” in the sense that you can hire more lawyers and get the paperwork done more quickly and more thoroughly if you have more money - someone who only has $50.00 isn’t going to get the amount of hours of labour that someone with six thousand dollars will get, and in fact it might not even buy enough time to complete the initial paperwork, so that person might never hear back from the Tribunal - not because they couldn’t get a Declaration of Nullity but just because the work was never able to be done, because the wages could not be paid.

But the result is the result - remember King Henry VIII? He never got a Declaration of Nullity, but it had nothing to do with him not having enough money. There are similar cases today.

 

[jmcrae]

So then that begs the question. While Jesus may not be happy with me getting divorced, would he prefer that I stay in that first disaster of a marriage and be spiritually dead?

You got the Declaration of Nullity, which means that in Jesus’ eyes, that marriage (and thus, the subsequent divorce) never existed in the first place. It was a porneia - an unlawful union - and it was right and good to end it.

Matthew 18:18 means that the authority given to the Tribunal to grant the Declaration of Nullity frees you from that “marriage” and allows you to marry for the first time in the eyes of Jesus, to your present wife.

 

[AgnosTheist]

From the Catholic bible, and catholic commentary:

drbo.org/chapter/47019.htm
9 And I say to you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and he that shall marry her that is put away, committeth adultery. 10 His disciples say unto him: If the case of a man with his wife be so, it is not expedient to marry.

9 “Except it be”… In the case of fornication, that is, of adultery, the wife may be put away: but even then the husband cannot marry another as long as the wife is living.

If the wife had committed fornication, then you can put away the wife. But the man still cannot remarry. I wonder what “put away” means. And Ive never seen such an interpretation put into practice. In reality when fornications occur, catholics either divorce, separate or annul. but in all 3 cases, catholics get to find another partner.

 

[lukewarm]

In reality when fornications occur, catholics either divorce, separate or annul. but in all 3 cases, catholics get to find another partner.

Or stay together, all people should get one free pass IMO, we’re all sinners… Ending a perfectly good marriage over one sexual indescretion is like trading an all-star shortstop for a couple errors in a game.

 

[qui_est_ce]

I would disagree with you. I can give you 2 examples where money spoke within the RCC on this very issue. We had very wealthy friends who were able to get an annulment within like 6 months. They paid $6000.00. Then still another waited over 2 years. And guess what. Both annulments were based on the same thing.

I have heard a lot of urban legends about the process. By Catholics themselves. You will never know that actual basis for granting the annulment, they don’t tell you. The money one is the most popular. I have found my own Archdiocese to be very sympathetic towards those sincerely seeking annulments. The priest in charge of the Tribunal spent a lot of time with me personally, as did my pastor. The Archdiocese usually charges a nominal fee to cover expenses.

I do know some people take a long time - years - to fill out the paper work, because it is so gut-wrenching. It really makes you examine yourself and your marriage. It is a good thing. Some, like me, got it over quickly, and my annulment went through within six months of filing the paperwork. It cost me $100.00, which they allowed me to pay in installments.

Sometimes the pastor takes a long time to get to through the paper work before he passes it on to the Tribunal. If he sees you in Church every Sunday, he might be inclined to be less busy on your paperwork…

 

[qui_est_ce]

From the Catholic bible, and catholic commentary:

drbo.org/chapter/47019.htm
9 And I say to you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and he that shall marry her that is put away, committeth adultery. 10 His disciples say unto him: If the case of a man with his wife be so, it is not expedient to marry.

9 “Except it be”… In the case of fornication, that is, of adultery, the wife may be put away: but even then the husband cannot marry another as long as the wife is living.

If the wife had committed fornication, then you can put away the wife. But the man still cannot remarry. I wonder what “put away” means. And Ive never seen such an interpretation put into practice. In reality when fornications occur, catholics either divorce, separate or annul. but in all 3 cases, catholics get to find another partner.

Not all, I personally know several couples who stayed together after the spouse had an affair.

Fornication is sex between a single person and another single or married person. Adultery is by a married person with someone other than their spous, be it maile of female.

Therefore, it is the sin that PRECEDES the marriage that make it invalid. Once you are married, that’s it. Forever. Doesn’t mean you have to live with them, it means you can’t marry another.

 

[AgnosTheist]

Not all, I personally know several couples who stayed together after the spouse had an affair.

of course. but i was referring to those catholics who underwent divorce, separation & annulment. when these things happen, its very rare to find one who does not end up with a new boy/girlfriend. especially if they are young.

with that, i dont think the catholic interpretation is realistic. when trust is broken, there should be a way to allow the wronged person to go forth and multiply.

 

[jmcrae]

of course. but i was referring to those catholics who underwent divorce, separation & annulment. when these things happen, its very rare to find one who does not end up with a new boy/girlfriend. especially if they are young.

A Declaration of Nullity means that they are free to marry, since the first relationship was not validly a marriage, so yes, they can certainly “go forth and multiply” - and hopefully they will have learned through the process of the Nullity proceedings what a marriage really is, and how to be a good husband or wife.

 

[lukewarm]

of course. but i was referring to those catholics who underwent divorce, separation & annulment. when these things happen, its very rare to find one who does not end up with a new boy/girlfriend. especially if they are young.

with that, i dont think the catholic interpretation is realistic.

Now that I do agree with, that’s what I was getting at when I said imagine being part of the sad 6% who get their annulments denied? Meanwhile Tommy Mattola is prancing down St Patrick’s shaking hands with Cardinal Egan for his third marriage…

Divorce is simply now a part of life as the sexes have reached an equal status and women no longer have to stay with abusive husbands, and husbands no longer have to stay with mentally abusive frigid women, they can now support themselves.

The Churches answer of “stay alone for the rest of your life” isn’t realistic. Even less realistic is a Catholic who remarries and then wants to come back to the Church and is told to “live as borther and sister”. What if they have kids? That’s a good environment? How absurd, certainly Christ’s Church can come up with a better solution than that?

 

[jmcrae]

Even less realistic is a Catholic who remarries and then wants to come back to the Church and is told to “live as borther and sister”. What if they have kids? That’s a good environment? How absurd, certainly Christ’s Church can come up with a better solution than that?

If a person sticks with the Catholic Church throughout the entire process, he will never end up in that situation.

It’s when people start trying to take shortcuts and going behind the Church’s back that they end up boxing themselves into these awkward corners.

 

[AgnosTheist]

A Declaration of Nullity means that they are free to marry, since the first relationship was not validly a marriage

what again are the conditions that makes a marriage invalid?

 

[jmcrae]

what again are the conditions that makes a marriage invalid?

This is from a report that I did for my parish a few years ago:

The Causes of Invalidity

· Lack of Canonical Form

This applies only to marriages where there was at least one party who was Catholic at the time of the wedding. Lack of canonical form means that the wedding took place outside the Church, without a priest, and without the Bishop’s permission to omit these details. Ordinarily, Catholics must be married in the Church before an ordained Catholic clergyman (deacon, priest, or Bishop) and in the presence of at least two witnesses.

· * Ligamen (Prior Bond)*

Someone who has been divorced, but has not received either a Declaration of Nullity or a Pauline Privilege for the previous marriage cannot validly enter into a second marriage. This marriage is invalid. (If a declaration of nullity is received after the second wedding, then a validation ceremony must take place before either party can begin to or again receive the Sacraments. This includes Baptism and Confirmation, as well as Holy Communion and Reconciliation.)

· lack of due discretion

This is an imprudent marriage between people who don’t know each other well enough to give informed consent (i.e.: a Vegas wedding), or who are too young to be able to freely consent, or who are being forced into the marriage against their will or better judgement.

· * intention against children*

If either party goes into the marriage with the intention of avoiding having children (either by using birth control or through improper use of NFP), this causes the marriage to be invalid.

· * inability due to causes of a psychic nature*

Alcoholics, drug addicts, the mentally ill, and the very young may be incapable of contracting a valid marriage, even if they have the best of intentions.

 

[swariffin]

Porneia is the original word used in Matthew and it means:

illicit sexual intercourse
adultery, fornication, homosexuality, lesbianism, intercourse with animals etc.
sexual intercourse with close relatives; Lev. 18
sexual intercourse with a divorced man or woman; Mk. 10:11,

In the douay rheims they use the word fornication. Other Bibles I’ve seen sexual immorality. Still others adultery. It seems porneia has adultery as one of it’s meanings.

This is taken right from the NT Greek Lexicon dictionary. I see your point with regard to Leviticus as it is referenced as the 4th definition. It still doesn’t take away the fact that Jesus said don’t divorce except for Pornneia.

PEACE

Peace to you too, Dear Deacon110,

When a man live in Porneia condition with the woman so-called to be his spouse, there can’t any sacred sacrament within those marriage. Those couple living in Porneia condition are still two persons, not two persons becoming one in a sacred marriage. When those couple separated, there can’t be any divorce, since there was no marriage within them. Jesus is right. Under the Porneia condition, there is no sacred sacrament.

Supposed you are separated from your sister since your childhood (same father and same mother). But, after years, you met your sister (but don’t know that she is your sister), you fall in love, and you marry her. Eventhough the ceremony has lasted and the Priest gave the blessing (and the government acknow-ledges your marriage), in the eye of god, your marriage is illegal. It does not mean you commit any sins, though. But, once your true relationship with your sister-wife is discovered, you can (and I believe you should) entitle for an annulment. It is not a divorce. I believe under modern genealogy we should not marry our direct brother/sister, because the tendency of defect of our offspring is increased, am I correct?