MORE QUESTIONS ON DIVORCE AND LEGAL SEPARATION

The Holy Matrimony - The Wedding of the Blessed Virgin with St. Joseph

 

Anonymous said... 

 

Hello father! Thank you very much for your explanations. Marami akong natutunan. Eto na lang hindi ko pa maintindihan:

1) 1 cor 7:10-11. "And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband: But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband: by saying "remain unmarried" this implies that "depart" means "divorce". I thought this is legal separation in our time but the phrase remain unmarried implies more on divorce.

2) I have read your explanation regarding the exception clause regarding "sexual immorality" that the person defiled himself/herself and that she is stoned to death so the widow can remarry. but i'm still confused. If Jesus made this exception for divorce then this means that at present time it should be ok for the church to accept divorce due to immorality since wala ng death penalty for adultery. Isn't this contradicting to our stand na "no to divorce?"

3)I saw in the Catholic encyclopedia (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05054c.htm) this statements: "Christ abolished entirely the permission which Moses had granted, even though this permission was strictly limited; He allowed a cause similar to "uncleanness" as reason for putting away the wife, but not for the dissolution of the marriage bond." If it is referring to Mt 19:9 then it seems contradicting because your explanation is that the verse is talking about "divorce" not just "separation"

4)In legal separation, if Jesus only exempted the "sexual immorality" why then are here other grounds for legal separation? Is Legal Separation not Catholic?

Thank you very much father. I hope you can enlighten me. 

November 16, 2011 12:39 AM 

 

Fr. Abe, CRS said... 

 

[Hello father! Thank you very much for your explanations. Marami akong natutunan.]

WELCOME BROD. SORRY FOR THE LATE REPLY. I DEBATED THE SSPX TRAITORS EARLIER.

[Eto na lang hindi ko pa maintindihan:

1) 1 cor 7:10-11. "And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband: But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband: by saying "remain unmarried" this implies that "depart" means "divorce". I thought this is legal separation in our time but the phrase remain unmarried implies more on divorce.]

NO, BROD. YOU'VE GOTTEN IT WRONG. IT IS NOT DIVORCE BUT LEGAL SEPARATION.

THE WORD 'DEPART' DOES NOT MEAN DIVORCE BECAUSE IF IT IS DIVORCE THE MARRIAGE IS DESTROYED AND THUS THE WOMAN OR MAN CAN REMARRY FOR THE SECOND TIME. INSTEAD THERE IS A VERY CLEAR PROHIBITION NOT TO REMARRY: "But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband". THE FACT THAT SHE CANNOT REMARRY ATTEST THAT THERE IS NO DIVORCE.ST. PAUL INSISTS THAT THE MARRIAGE IS STILL VALID AND INTACT. THIS IS FURTHER PROVEN THAT THE OTHER OPTION IS BE RECONCILED WITH THE HUSBAND. IT MEANS IT IS MERE 'LEGAL SEPARATION' BECAUSE WHILE PHYSICALLY SEPARATED THEY ARE LEGALLY AND SPIRITUALLY HUSBAND AND WIFE STILL. 

[2) I have read your explanation regarding the exception clause regarding "sexual immorality" that the person defiled himself/herself and that she is stoned to death so the widow can remarry.]

THAT IS ONLY ONE OF THE EXPLANATIONS I HAVE GIVEN.

[but i'm still confused. If Jesus made this exception for divorce then this means that at present time it should be ok for the church to accept divorce due to immorality since wala ng death penalty for adultery. Isn't this contradicting to our stand na "no to divorce?"]

THE PHRASE 'except on the ground of unchastity' IS NOT AN EXCEPTION ON THE INDISSOLUBILITY OF MARRIAGE. THIS IS PROVEN BY THE VERY FACT THAT SUCH PHRASE IS EEMOVED LATER IN LK 16:18, MK 10:11-12 AND 1 COR 7:10-11 AND ANY DOUBT CONCERNING THE INDISSOLUBILITY OF MARRIAGE HAS BEEN REMOVED. THERE IS NO EXCEPTIONAL CLAUSE. THIS PASSAGE MUST BE VIEWED NOT AS AN EXCUSE FOR DISSOLUTION OF MARRIAGE.

WHAT DOES IT MEAN? THE IGNATIUS CATHOLLIC STUDY BIBLE PROPOSES THREE EXPLANATIONS. BUT LET ME CITE ONLY TWO OF THEM SINCE IT IS NOT MY INTENTION TO PUT EVERYTHING HERE, IM NOT WRITING A BOOK BUT RESPONSES:

1. THE PATRISTIC VIEWS
The Church Fathers explained that Jesus allowed separation from an adulterious wife or husband but never permitted remarriage after. So this is really corresponds to LEGAL SEPARATION wherein the marriage bond is preserved intact. This is supported by St. Paul in 1 Cor 7:10-11 wherein the two options available to the couple who separated is RECONCILIATION or REMAIN SINGLE. There is NO REMARRIAGE at all.

2. THE LEVITICAL LAW ASPECT
That 'unchastity' referred in Mt 19:9 refers to INVALID MARRIAGES where the spouses are closely blood related which according to the Law of God is 'unchaste relation' or 'unclean'. This view is supported by 2 passages in the New Testament wherein PORNEIA refers to INCEST [cf. Acts 15:20, 29] where the apostles commanded the faithful to abstain from unchastity. This is supported in the Old Testament by Lev 18:6-18 which suggests that unchastity refers to prohibited marriages between closely related kinsfolk. The second passage is 1 Cor 5:1-2 where porneia clearly refers to an illicit union of a man and his father's wife. 

 

[3)I saw in the Catholic encyclopedia (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05054c.htm) this statements: "Christ abolished entirely the permission which Moses had granted, even though this permission was strictly limited; He allowed a cause similar to "uncleanness" as reason for putting away the wife, but not for the dissolution of the marriage bond."]

YES, VERY NICE.

[If it is referring to Mt 19:9 then it seems contradicting because your explanation is that the verse is talking about "divorce" not just "separation"]

THERE IS NO CONTRADICTION BUT ACTUALLY IT SUPPORTS MY EXPLANATION. REMEMBER MY ARGUMENTS SUPPORT THE TEACHING OF JESUS AND THE CHURCH: DIVORCE IS PROHIBITED. NO TO DIVORCE. THE PROOF IS THAT THE LORD DECLARED: "WHAT GOD HAD UNITED LET NO MAN PUT ASUNDER." THAT IS CLEAR, CATEGORICAL REJECTION OF DIVORCE.

NOW, THE EXCEPTIONAL CLAUSE DOES NOT PROVIDE FOR DIVORCE BUT ONLY FOR LEGAL SEPARATION. I NEVER ARGUED THAT DIVORCE CAN BE DONE IN AN EXCEPTIONAL CASE. WHERE? I ALREADY WROTE THAT WE ONLY ACCEPT 'LEGAL SEPARATION' AND 'ANNULMENT' BUT NOT DIVORCE. READ AGAIN MY STATEMENTS.

[4)In legal separation, if Jesus only exempted the "sexual immorality" why then are here other grounds for legal separation?]

JESUS GAVE JUSTIFICATION FOR LEGAL SEPARATION IN CASE OF UNCHASTITY BUT THAT UNCHASTITY IS BROAD AND MULTI-FACETED. IT IS NOT LIMITED TO ONE CASE ONLY. THIS IS TESTIFIED FOR BY ST. PAUL THE APOSTLE IN 1 COR 7:10-11

1 Cor 7:10-11 To the married I give charge, not I but the Lord, that the wife should not separate from her husband (but if she does, let her remain single or else be reconciled to her husband) --and that the husband should not divorce his wife.

SO, ST. PAUL TAUGHT THAT THE WIFE COULD SEPARATE FROM THE HUSBAND BUT MUST NOT REMARRY. THEY EITHER BE RECONCILED OR REMAIN SINGLE SINCE THEY ARE MARRIED LEGALLY. ST. PAUL DIDN'T PROVIDE REASONS FOR SUCH A SEPARATION. IT IS THE DUTY OF THE CHURCH TO CHECK ON THE PRACTIAL SITUATIONS SUCH AS 'PHYSICAL ABUSES' IN ORDER TO DISCERN IF THE SEPARATION IS JUSTIFIED OR NOT.

ANOTHER CASE OF SEPARATION THAT IS GIVEN BY THE BIBLE IS THE SO-CALLED PAULINE PRIVILEGE:

1 Cor 7:12-14 To the rest I say, not the Lord, that if any brother has a wife who is an unbeliever, and she consents to live with him, he should not divorce her. If any woman has a husband who is an unbeliever, and he consents to live with her, she should not divorce him. For the unbelieving husband is consecrated through his wife, and the unbelieving wife is consecrated through her husband. Otherwise, your children would be unclean, but as it is they are holy.

1 Cor 7:15 But if the unbelieving partner desires to separate, let it be so; in such a case the brother or sister is not bound. For God has called us to peace.

SO, ST. PAUL PROVIDED ANOTHER REASON FOR LEGAL SEPARATION BESIDES UNCHASTITY... THAT IS, THE VOLUNTARY DECISION OF AN UNBELIEVING PARTNER TO LEAVE.

[Is Legal Separation not Catholic?]

LEGAL SEPARATION IS ACCEPTED BY THE CATHOLIC CHURCH BECAUSE IT IS NOT THE DESTRUCTION OR DISSOLUTIONMENT OF MARRIAGE OR DIVORCE.

[Thank you very much father. I hope you can enlighten me.]

WELCOME BROD. HOPE THIS WILL HELP YOU. 

November 21, 2011 4:44 PM