Levirate Marriage

  • Thread starter Thread starter IAmCatholic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I

IAmCatholic

Guest
What is levirate marriage? Does it still apply? What did Jesus say about it?

To me, it doesn’t sound “free” (requirements for a valid marriage).
 
What is levirate marriage? Does it still apply? What did Jesus say about it?

To me, it doesn’t sound “free” (requirements for a valid marriage).
Catholic Encyclopedia
Frequently, if not generally, the first husband enjoyed conjugal and domestic rights superior to the others, was, in fact, the chief husband. The others were husbands only in a secondary and limited sense. Both these circumstances show that even in the comparatively few cases in which polyandry existed it was softened in the direction of monogamy; for the wife belonged not to several entirely independent men, but to a group united by the closest ties of blood; she was married to one family rather than to one person. And the fact that one of her consorts possessed superior marital privileges shows that she had only one husband in the full sense of the term. Some writers, e.g. McLennan (Studies in Ancient History, pp.112, sq.) have asserted that the Levirate, the custom which compelled the brother of a deceased husband to marry his widow, had its origin in polyandry.
Ryan, J.A. (1910). History of Marriage. In The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09693a.htm
 
Last edited:
The Biblical explanation is in Deut 25:5-10. If a man died childless, it was his brother’s duty to provide him with a posterity:

5 When brothers reside together, and one of them dies and has no son, the wife of the deceased shall not be married outside the family to a stranger. Her husband’s brother shall go in to her, taking her in marriage, and performing the duty of a husband’s brother to her, 6 and the firstborn whom she bears shall succeed to the name of the deceased brother, so that his name may not be blotted out of Israel. 7 But if the man has no desire to marry his brother’s widow, then his brother’s widow shall go up to the elders at the gate and say, “My husband’s brother refuses to perpetuate his brother’s name in Israel; he will not perform the duty of a husband’s brother to me.” 8 Then the elders of his town shall summon him and speak to him. If he persists, saying, “I have no desire to marry her,” 9 then his brother’s wife shall go up to him in the presence of the elders, pull his sandal off his foot, spit in his face, and declare, “This is what is done to the man who does not build up his brother’s house.” 10 Throughout Israel his family shall be known as “the house of him whose sandal was pulled off.”

 
Isn’t it a little…strange…to have to marry you brother’s widow to provide future generations? Isn’t that unfair to the not dead brother?
 
It’s only unfair inasmuch as it means he will have two wives and families to support.
 
I guess I’m pretty happy that I had a son…and that my husband didn’t die. I in no way want to marry my brother in law! 😂

Of course, I’m not a Levite, either…so there’s that! :hugs:
 
Last edited:
Widowed childless women had no means of support in that time and culture. She would likely end up as a beggar or worse. This was a kindness to support these widows.
 
What if the brother was already married. Could you have multiple wives then? If so, why was that a thing?
 
I just googled it. Thank GOD that’s not Catholic doctrine. Yuck.
 
I guess I’m pretty happy that I had a son…and that my husband didn’t die. I in no way want to marry my brother in law!
I think you’re being light hearted, but is it still practised in modern Judasim?

It hadn’t crossed my mind that it would be, but your comment made me wonder.
 
Last edited:
Heavens no! 😂. So many of the OT laws applied strictly to the priesthood and without a Temple, no longer apply.

The interesting question is, if the Temple is rebuilt and the priesthood resumed…would this also?

I have no idea but I kind of doubt it. The reasons for it no longer are relevant but I could also see some very Orthodox Jews trying to re establish it! 😱
 
Yes. Abraham had two wives, Solomon had many wives and concubines, polygamy was part of the culture.
 
Monogamous societies has always existed. In fact, monogamy is older than polygamy. In hunter-gatherer cultures, monogamy is usually practiced since polygamy is only possible when some men can get a surplus of resources to take care of several wives. Since hunter-gatherers don’t really have a concept of private property this surplus can only be created in agrarian or at least pastoralist cultures.
 
Last edited:
when doing male things is more deadly than doing female things, you end up with an excess of adult females that you have to do something about.

And simple math means that groups that married these woman to already married men would have more children than those that didn’t, and become larger than their neighbors. (After which, they would likely do male things to their smaller neighbor, and collect their widows, and the cycle repeats).

While mormons violently deny it, shooting mormons predates their polygamy, which was actually a response to an excess of widows.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top