Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
What is your source on this meaning of the word porneia? I am very curious.Poor translation of the Greek word porneia which early Christians understood to mean unlawful has resulted in the corruption of Jesus' and the apostles' teaching/preaching on marriage.
Matthew 19:9-10
I say to you, whoever divorces his wife (unless the marriage is unlawful) and marries another commits adultery.” 10 [His] disciples said to him, “If that is the case of a man with his wife, it is better not to marry.” nabre
The RCC now has a ton of half-baked reasons for a marriage to be invalid, just to accommodate divorce, and it's a crisis. These reasons for the marriage having never been valid, coupled with the numerous others, would make quite a few marriages invalid, meaning you have a ton of Catholics living in fornication and sin. The Pope recently went so far as to suggest most Catholic marriages are invalid because the people involved don't truly understand it's a lifelong commitment (in essence, trying to make it easier for them to use that as grounds to divo--er, "annul"). By using annulment as a stand-in for divorce (which it is increasingly used for), this tremendous issue has arisen. An annulment means the marriage was never valid, and whether or not it is "discovered" that the marriage wasn't valid, has no bearing on that. So you can never know if your marriage is valid unless you push with all your might to have it annulled through as many avenues as possible, and it gets turned down; until then, you might be unknowingly living in fornication.Sorta. But you have middied the terminology a bit.
The Church addresses the question of whether a marriage was valid or not valid. If it's not valid and declared not valid then it never was a marriage, considered null and void.
If you have a serious reason for a divorce you may divorce without sin. You have a valid reason to separate or even divorce from an abusive spouse. That does not necessarily mean that the original marriage was invalid. Divorce when needed for serious reason. But that does not guarantee that the marriage never existed. The Church only says that remarriage is not possible if the original marriage was valid. Not to forbid a separation or divorce.
Porneia refers to illicit sexual intercourse, such as those listed in Leviticus. The pagan world in Jesus' time accepted as "marriage" many relationships that Jews would acknowledge only as sin, such as incestuous relationships. What Jesus was saying is that these sort of invalid "marriages" could and should be left and a person could remarry without it being adultery.What is your source on this meaning of the word porneia? I am very curious.
Unless there is an extremely good reason for the divorce, then divorce and remarriage is adultery. God doesn't recognizance the new marriage, he sees it as an adulterous relationship, as Christ made expressly clear.
There are some very good reasons why a marriage may have been invalid from the beginning. They were given a few posts ago by someone else. These are real. Marriage needs the informed consent of both spouses, for a permanent faithful life open to procreation. That isn't always the case these days.The RCC now has a ton of half-baked reasons for a marriage to be invalid, just to accommodate divorce, and it's a crisis. These reasons for the marriage having never been valid, coupled with the numerous others, would make quite a few marriages invalid, meaning you have a ton of Catholics living in fornication and sin. The Pope recently went so far as to suggest most Catholic marriages are invalid because the people involved don't truly understand it's a lifelong commitment (in essence, trying to make it easier for them to use that as grounds to divo--er, "annul"). By using annulment as a stand-in for divorce (which it is increasingly used for), this tremendous issue has arisen. An annulment means the marriage was never valid, and whether or not it is "discovered" that the marriage wasn't valid, has no bearing on that. So you can never know if your marriage is valid unless you push with all your might to have it annulled through as many avenues as possible, and it gets turned down; until then, you might be unknowingly living in fornication.
I dread this topic, because it is the source of so much suffering in the world, and my immediate inclination is simply to respond to people with compassion rather than by reciting laws. However this is a question about God's law and so I am going to stick to the point.Unless there is an extremely good reason for the divorce, then divorce and remarriage is adultery. God doesn't recognizance the new marriage, he sees it as an adulterous relationship, as Christ made expressly clear.
It's not just "too many annulments", it's that several of the reasons considered valid are ridiculous and sometimes (perhaps intentionally) vague, as a way of letting people divorce by saying the marriage was never valid. Are you saying if you have a "deficit" in understanding what marriage entails (which I think most of us would, a lot of it is something you learn as you go), then your marriage was never valid, and you are living in fornication?There are some very good reasons why a marriage may have been invalid from the beginning. They were given a few posts ago by someone else. These are real. Marriage needs the informed consent of both spouses, for a permanent faithful life open to procreation. That isn't always the case these days.
The presumption is, in canon law, that marriages are valid unless shown to be invalid. Nobody needs to concern themselves about proving that their marriage is valid, worrying that they are actually fornicating. If they figure out later that there was a serious flaw in consent then they can seek an annulment. But they can also perfect their consent at any time if they so choose.
Too many annulments? Yup. Some of that is the tribunal judges being too wimpy. Some of it is that Christians are rapidly losing the common understanding of marriage they once had, adopting the cultural societal norms of a temporary contract, childless contract, and/or semi-faithful marriage. We are less and less likely to understand marriage and thus more and more likely to have deficits in proper consent for marriage. Counseling before marriage helps, but there is a lot of unlearning that needs to be done. Doesn't always happen.
I do believe that the Church do have a lot to say in, what will be legal in society. Matthew 18:18 speaks about the Christians having a governmental power. And I also believe that most of the Church do not understand this power given to them.We had better come back to this correct understanding of this passage, because our society is allowing for more and more invalid marriages. We now have gay marriages, and polygamous an incestuous marriages are knocking on the door.
How can you consent to a contract (covenant) if you don't understand what you are agreeing to?Are you saying if you have a "deficit" in understanding what marriage entails (which I think most of us would, a lot of it is something you learn as you go), then your marriage was never valid, and you are living in fornication?
No. Or actually yes, for a serious deficit. I am saying that some people really don't know that marriage is supposed to be permanent and/or faithful and or open to life.They just don't get that even though they say the words. Some people are not capable of meaning those words for one serious reason or another. Nobody knows exactly what they are getting into in marriage but we make that commitment to permanence and faithfulness and openness to children anyhow. Or some of us make that commitment while others make some other culturally normative lesser commitments that are deficient in the ideas of permanence or faithfulness or openness to children.Are you saying if you have a "deficit" in understanding what marriage entails (which I think most of us would, a lot of it is something you learn as you go), then your marriage was never valid, and you are living in fornication?
If you are saying the marriage was always invalid, isn't that saying it's the same as fornication? Sex is either fornication, or it isn't: there is no in between. If sex is not in marriage, it is fornication, yes? And if the marriage was never valid, there was no marriage, meaning no sex had was in marriage, yes? So was there a marriage, or wasn't there? If there was a marriage, then it's not "annulment", it's divorce. And if there wasn't marriage, then all the sex was fornication. If, from a Catholic perspective, you can never marry again once you're married (if the spouse is still living), then the marriage had to have been invalid, as in not an actual marriage, but a phony marriage; that is required for a remarriage.How can you consent to a contract (covenant) if you don't understand what you are agreeing to?
I don't think anyone is saying that a legal, albeit sacramentally invalid, marriage is the same thing as fornication. But it is not what God wants, and it can and should be left.
And all the sex these people have in their "marriage" (the marriage never was actual), is fornication, right? Even if the marriage lasts until death?No. Or actually yes, for a serious deficit. I am saying that some people really don't know that marriage is supposed to be permanent and/or faithful and or open to life.They just don't get that even though they say the words. Some people are not capable of meaning those words for one serious reason or another. Nobody knows exactly what they are getting into in marriage but we make that commitment to permanence and faithfulness and openness to children anyhow. Or some of us make that commitment while others make some other culturally normative lesser commitments that are deficient in the ideas of permanence or faithfulness or openness to children.
You seem to be the only one saying so. But if that's how you see it ....And all the sex these people have in their "marriage" (the marriage never was actual), is fornication, right? Even if the marriage lasts until death?
Oh, I can't disagree more strongly. The culture wars are over, and Christians have lost. A new era has begun in our culture where traditional values will be persecuted; the Church will be persecuted as "intolerant" for promoting traditional values. We now have gay marriages, men in women's bathrooms, and be prepared for polygamous and incestuous marriages next.I do believe that the Church do have a lot to say in, what will be legal in society. Matthew 18:18 speaks about the Christians having a governmental power.
I answered your question. You may not have liked my answer, but it doesn't mean you should ask me again.If you are saying the marriage was always invalid, isn't that saying it's the same as fornication?
Your answer dichotomizes the covenant and the Sacrament, but the whole basis of the Sacrament being invalid in Catholic annulments is that the covenant was invalid. Ergo, it's incoherent to say the covenant was valid, but the Sacrament was invalid.I answered your question. You may not have liked my answer, but it doesn't mean you should ask me again.
The Bible has a word, "overcome", in Revelation. It does mean that we have the victory and shall live by it.The culture wars are over, and Christians have lost.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?