Protestants and divorce

[larkin31]

Honestly, I think the baseline issue is that most people don’t really feel that a priest or minister or Bishop or God ought to keep anyone in a loveless, miserable marriage, even if adultery is not the issue (although it often becomes one).

And I don’t blame them.

 

[PRmerger]

Honestly, I think the baseline issue is that most people don’t really feel that a priest or minister or Bishop or God ought to keep anyone in a loveless, miserable marriage, even if adultery is not the issue (although it often becomes one).

And I don’t blame them.

The CC does not say you must live in this loveless, miserable marriage. That’s :whacky:

You are certainly free to separate.

And, if it’s not a sacramental union, you can seek a declaration of nullity.

 

[larkin31]

The CC does not say you must live in this loveless, miserable marriage. That’s :whacky:

You are certainly free to separate.

And, if it’s not a sacramental union, you can seek a declaration of nullity.

That is not a sufficient answer for many persons, nor would it be for me. I find this answer hypocritical, and likely not what is meant Biblically, either.

But, of course, religious institutions are free to deny marriage ceremonies to whom they wish, and I do not begrudge them this. I am trying to explain the basic reason why people seek divorce–beyond separation.

I see, and never saw, sin in divorce. Nor did my religious parents.

 

[PRmerger]

That is not a sufficient answer for many persons, nor would it be for me. I find this answer hypocritical, and likely not what is meant Biblically, either.

But, of course, religious institutions are free to deny marriage ceremonies to whom they wish, and I do not begrudge them this. I am trying to explain the basic reason why people seek divorce–beyond separation.

I see, and never saw, sin in divorce. Nor did my religious parents.

Perhaps you don’t see sin in divorce because you don’t believe in sin itself? Is that correct?

If you don’t believe in God, then how can you believe in sin?

 

[Mosacked]

Well there is some information given in Scripture about divorce. First of all there is God’s view on divorce:
Malachi 2:16 (NASB)
“For I hate divorce,” says the LORD, the God of Israel, “and him who covers his garment with wrong,” says the LORD of hosts. “So take heed to your spirit, that you do not deal treacherously.”

There is however a law about divorce in the Old Testament.
Deuteronomy 24:1 (NASB)
"When a man takes a wife and marries her, and it happens that she finds no favor in his eyes because he has found some indecency in her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce and puts it in her hand and sends her out from his house,

The explanation for this paradoxon can be found in the words of our Lord Jesus Christ:
Matthew 19:6-9 (NASB)
“So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.”
They said to Him, “Why then did Moses command to GIVE HER A CERTIFICATE OF DIVORCE AND SEND her AWAY?”
He said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way.
“And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.”

Looking at this it becomes clear that the Lord hates divorce, but that in a case of infidelity there is a legal way to divorce a partner. This is however not because God wilt it that way, but because the people are hard of heart.
I therefore dislike divorce and I see it as wrong. I do however agree that in some cases like infidelity there is not much of another way than divorce if the partners are so hard of heart. In all other cases there should be a way to work this problem out even though there has been infidelity.
After the initial falling in love loving somebody is a decision we can make. After the initial hype is over we have to decide to love somebody or not. Some people are blessed with partners that are completely incompatible to them. This will help them become more like Jesus Christ by loving someone who is not deserving of this love. We will not always find the right partner we would wish to have, but we will find the partner God wants us to have.
While working on a marriage we learn to forgive each other, even though the partner might not be deserving of our forgiveness… God forgives us so much more however. A marriage is a way to become more like God wanted us to be in the first place.

Peace be to you, and love with faith, from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.
In Him,
Janet

Janet, May God bless you for your wisdom. Very well spoken, if only more understood what you were saying in " We will not always find the right partner we would wish to have, but we will find the partner God wants us to have. While working on a marriage we learn to forgive each other, even though the partner might not be deserving of our forgiveness… God forgives us so much more however. A marriage is a way to become more like God wanted us to be in the first place."

God hates divorces. That statement alone is sufficient for those who wish to know what God’s stand is on divorce.
.

 

[larkin31]

Perhaps you don’t see sin in divorce because you don’t believe in sin itself? Is that correct?

If you don’t believe in God, then how can you believe in sin?

I do believe in fundamental wrongs (“sin”), and I am trying to use terminology that you would agree with. Divorce is not a fundamental wrong in my opinion. And most of society agrees with this. The union between the couple is a failure, unhappiness abounds, infidelity will most likely occur…let them start over with someone else. No “sin” here.

 

[PRmerger]

I do believe in fundamental wrongs (“sin”), and I am trying to use terminology that you would agree with. Divorce is not a fundamental wrong in my opinion.** And most of society agrees with this**.

OhmyGOSH–really, larkin? You really think society agrees that there’s nothing wrong with divorce?

All I had to do was google “divorce social problem” and this came up:

[SIGN1]1,890,000 for divorce social problem. [/SIGN1]

:bigyikes:

In the entire history of civilization there has never been a better way to raise children than in a culture in which marriage is the fundamental unit of society.

Certainly, each couple considering divorce thinks, “Divorce is wrong for everyone else, but in my case it’s necessary.”

It is clearly a sin/fundamenta wrong/scourge on society/social problem.

If increased depression, abuse, neglect, addiction, poor academic success in divorced households etc etc etc don’t move you to change your position, perhaps the fact that it affects your wallet will:

Government is spending close to $1 billion a year attempting to alleviate
the suffering and problems associated with divorce. In fact, nearly every
social program dollar Georgia spends is directly related to a need that was
created by broken families.

 

[larkin31]

OhmyGOSH–really, larkin? You really think society agrees that there’s nothing wrong with divorce?

All I had to do was google “divorce social problem” and this came up:

[SIGN1]1,890,000 for divorce social problem. [/SIGN1]

:bigyikes:

In the entire history of civilization there has never been a better way to raise children than in a culture in which marriage is the fundamental unit of society.

Certainly, each couple considering divorce thinks, “Divorce is wrong for everyone else, but in my case it’s necessary.”

It is clearly a sin/fundamenta wrong/scourge on society/social problem.

If increased depression, abuse, neglect, addiction, poor academic success in divorced households etc etc etc don’t move you to change your position, perhaps the fact that it affects your wallet will:

Government is spending close to $1 billion a year attempting to alleviate
the suffering and problems associated with divorce. In fact, nearly every
social program dollar Georgia spends is directly related to a need that was
created by broken families.

I did not say that “nothing was wrong with divorce.” You are misrepresenting me. I said that it was not a sin, and was not fundamentally wrong. Divorce is a freedom that I am willing to bear the cost of, since there is no fundamental wrong at the heart of it: ending a miserable marriage is not fundamentally wrong, and we should permit it and agree to bear the cost–as is true with many other freedoms that society permits. The cost of this freedom is better than the price of forced misery if we deny the freedom.

In the case of divorce, I vote for freedom over sin.

 

[PRmerger]

I did not say that “nothing was wrong with divorce.” You are misrepresenting me.

I stand corrected. I amend my statement to this:

OhmyGOSH–really, larkin? You really think society agrees that divorce is not fundamentally wrong?

All I had to do was google “divorce social problem” and this came up:

1,890,000 for divorce social problem.

In the entire history of civilization there has never been a better way to raise children than in a culture in which marriage is the fundamental unit of society.

Certainly, each couple considering divorce thinks, “Divorce is wrong for everyone else, but in my case it’s necessary.”

It is clearly a sin/fundamenta wrong/scourge on society/social problem.

If increased depression, abuse, neglect, addiction, poor academic success in divorced households etc etc etc don’t move you to change your position, perhaps the fact that it affects your wallet will:

Government is spending close to $1 billion a year attempting to alleviate
the suffering and problems associated with divorce. In fact, nearly every
social program dollar Georgia spends is directly related to a need that was
created by broken families.

ADDENDUM:

Clearly society sees divorce as a fundamental wrong.

 

[PRmerger]

In the case of divorce, I vote for freedom over sin.

You are creating a false dichotomy between freedom and sin.

As St. Augustine said, *“Love God and do what you will.” *

 

[larkin31]

ADDENDUM:

Clearly society sees divorce as a fundamental wrong.

This is not at all a logical conclusion from the material you presented, which was about “cost”.

Please read my reply above that explains what I see as a difference between the “cost” of a freedom and whether that freedom is fundamentally “wrong”. All freedoms have costs associated with them.

Should a wife of an abuser have to suffer the “cost” of that abuse simply because she was married in a church? Should her children? Are you not going to acknowledge the “costs” of terrible marriages? Are you not aware of the improvements that many divorces bring to many households, or that many re-marriages bring to those persons and families?

 

[larkin31]

You are creating a false dichotomy between freedom and sin.

As St. Augustine said, *“Love God and do what you will.” *

Explain what you mean by this, rather than simply quoting someone else’s religious aphorism.

 

[PRmerger]

This is not at all a logical conclusion from the material you presented, which was about “cost”.

Umm…no, my material was not only about “cost.”
Did you miss my reference to the link to depression, abuse, neglect, addiction, poor academic success?

Should a wife of an abuser have to suffer the “cost” of that abuse simply because she was married in a church? Should her children?

Not at all. The CC does not claim the wife of an abuse has to suffer the “cost” of that abuse simply because she was married in a church. She is, in fact, obligated to leave and provide for her safety and the safety of her children.

 

[jmcrae]

Honestly, I think the baseline issue is that most people don’t really feel that a priest or minister or Bishop or God ought to keep anyone in a loveless, miserable marriage, even if adultery is not the issue (although it often becomes one).

They should have thought of that before exchanging rings and pledging fidelity “until death ye do part.” Sorry but I have very little sympathy for grown adults who turn out to be just overgrown children, tired of playing house.

Marriage is hard work. That’s why it’s only for grown-ups.

 

[PRmerger]

Explain what you mean by this, rather than simply quoting someone else’s religious aphorism.

I suggest you start with reading this.

 

[PRmerger]

Are you not aware of the improvements that many divorces bring to many households, or that many re-marriages bring to those persons and families?

Can you cite some sources for these alleged improvements to our society that divorce and re-marriage has accomplished?

 

[schaick]

This whole annulment business is down right silly- if there were children involved then of course there was a marriage, if both parties married of thir own free will of course thre was a marriage.

Annulment whitewashes the sad fact that people sin and make wrong choices, somtimes causing hurt for the innocent. Anulment sends the message that those involved do not have to take responsibility for their mistakes. Oh, it wasn’t really a marriage!?!

According to Jesus the only out:

**Matthew 5:**32But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery.

**Matthew 19:**8Jesus replied, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning 9I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery.”

This issue will never be solved until all understand that Catholics believe that marriage is a sacrament Trinitarian Christians do not.

Marriage is a sacred covenant between 2 people. A good marriage can be a blessing but, a marriage, no matter how wonderful can bring you closer to GOD as the Eucharist or Baptism can. If that was the case just think how far away from GOD Priests and Popes are having been denied the Sacrament of Marriage.

I can see Baptism, Confirmation, Holy Eucharist, Penance, Anointing of the Sick, Holy Orders as a rite in which GOD is uniquely active- marriage no.

Define sacrament.

 

[PRmerger]

This whole annulment business is down right silly- if there were children involved then of course there was a marriage,

Why? Can’t 2 people have children without being married?

if both parties married of thir own free will of course thre was a marriage.

I can think of a situation in which 2 people who “married” of their own free will that was not a marriage–because the man was already married.

Thus, even though the man and woman were together of their own free will, they were not married.

 

[PRmerger]

If that was the case just think how far away from GOD Priests and Popes are having been denied the Sacrament of Marriage.

Who denied Pope B16 the opportunity to be married? :whacky:

I am quite certain that, had he chosen it, he would not have been “denied the Sacrament of Marriage.”

 

[larkin31]

Can you cite some sources for these alleged improvements to our society that divorce and re-marriage has accomplished?

I wrote this: Are you not aware of the improvements that many divorces bring to many households, or that many re-marriages bring to those persons and families? NOT what your question asks me to show data for. Once again you are ignoring the other side of the coin. I keep acknowledging that divorce has some costs. Will you not acknowledge “the improvements that many divorces bring to many households, or that many re-marriages bring to those persons and families”? Are you claiming that NO persons or marriages or households are improved the second time around? Don’t you personally know of any? (I sure do).

Divorce is no fundamental wrong, and this is why the Bible allows it for adultery. We, in America, do not disallow divorce or remarriage because it costs society any more than we disallow driving cars or voting or having children or alcohol/smoking because they, too, have social costs. To tell some people that they cannot divorce and remarry because some others have abused that freedom (or neglected their ex-spouses or children) is generally not how a free (relatively speaking) society operates.

But again, every church is free to marry (or prohibit to marry) whomever they wish. Catholic stricture in this regard is another reason I could never be one, and the existence of “annulment” is an institutional hypocrisy to get around the hard-luck cases.