Which is more moral? Marriage question

[ZiSunka]

People get really invested in the loves of TV and movie stars these days.

You only have to pick up a newspaper or turn on the TV to see Hollywood couples' love lives everywhere. Even serious news programs have started to report on the match ups and break ups of Hollywood couples, whether they are married or living together in sin.

They get married, live together for 3 -6 years, then get divorced. Or they move in together, live together for 3 -6 years, then move out. They are constantly changing partners.

My question:

In light of these short-term serial relationships, which is more moral--living together outside of marriage, where no divorce is necessary, or marrying then divorcing constantly.

I asked some catholic friends, including a priest, and they said that in the eyes of their church, it is better to live in sin and then repent than it is to marry and then divorce. They said that someone who lives in sin a hundred times is still eligible to marry someday, but a person who marries their first love and then is divorced would be forbidden to ever remarry, unless they could prove the marriage was never valid to begin with.

Does the Bible address this kind of serial marriage/concubinage?

 

[BobSevenEleven]

That is kinda like asking is it better to steal from a grocery store or a department store, neither is right. The Bible addresses divorce, and when couples "live" together they are usually not staying in seperate rooms, and that is addressed as well.

 

[ZiSunka]

I'd like to clarify that when I say live together, I mean they live together with full sexual privileges. I don't mean roommates or boarder/landlord.

 

[Danfrey]

I think that this falls into the lesser of two evils catagory. I don't think I would like to choose either. I was one of those marry and divorce people in the past, and have also been a live in sin type in the past. Both are sinful. I think you will find more acceptance in the conservative churches of people that have the live in sin past than the remarriage past.

This question has been the single biggest problem for my family in the church. I have my reservations about divorce in the case of adultery, but because there is enough doubt in my mind, I will never remarry again.

 

[Antje]

Neither is great. I think it's a matter of whether you take marriage too seriously (you don't believe you could ever get it right, so you just live together) or not seriously enough (you get married "as long as we both shall love" instead of "live"...I've actually heard of people saying that in their vows!).

I guess if I had to choose, I would rather have people err on the side of taking marriage too seriously. At least the people who are living together aren't faking a true commitment.

 

[Jehane]

Sin is sin. I do not think the bible makes these sort of distinctions. Sin is displeasing to God. End of story.