Adult Child of divorced parents here. It never ends. Every holiday, special event, every milestone is divided. It even impacts my kids. Always having to strategize and make sure no one is offended or offensive or feel lefft out. It never ends.
When I was going through marriage prep, a priest told me to truly consider the marriage vows. He said that people usually only consider the first part of "for better or for worse." But you're actually vowing to remain married even if your spouse causes financial ruin, becomes chronically ill, or even objectively makes your life worse. It was quite sobering.
@@dominictafoya2205 this doesn't mean the Church is for allowing divorce. It's merely a warning as to how serious the union is. Conversations about marriage naturally include all possibilities inside that relationship. Both the absolute worst and the absolute best simultaneously.
The Orthodox Church holds marriage sacred as well. I ask young people today, 'what does marriage mean?' The answer I get most of the time is, 'I don't know.' That is a failure on everyone's part. We have allowed entertainment to define our culture for far too long. I've also heard people say they just aren't happy anymore. What does that mean? People are expected to dance on a razor's edge the entire relationship hoping you wake up happy every single day? Ridiculous. When you marry, there's a third person in that marriage, Jesus.
@@Rocky-nj8lk Well, that's a difficult issue. Officially, "the Orthodox Church" (though actually there is no unified opinion on this in Orthodoxy, as on many issues) only recognizes the first marriage as such. But it does have an liturgical rite for the second marriage (officially called a penitetial rite, though the ones I've seen were anything but penitential, actually were the normal marriage rites). And furthermore, it depends on the nation's liturgical traditions, some predominantly Orthodox countries are stricter than others. After haveing done the "penitential rite", the second marriage is fully accepted in Church life and the couple can receive the sacraments like anybody else.
I was so young when I divorced. Looking back 30+ years ago, I realize how fully selfish and blind I was. I had kids! I had NO RIGHT to leave. But I did, and hurt so many. Many many many tears would follow.
Doing more than the bare minimum is a mentality that should be applied to any loving relationship. It's disingenuous to say "I love you" when you consistently put in the lowest effort possible, rather than wondering how you can strengthen such bonds.
I was 'married' to an abuser for 20 years, i stayed because i took my vows seriously, but in the end i feared for my life and the safety of my children. I separated and he divorced me. My case is currently being reviewd by the marriage tribunal, but regardless of the outcome i cannot imagine attempting marriage again.
The Church has far too many modernists and bishops who have no faith in your ability or God's grace to keep you chaste. There are saints who were sanctified by situations like yours. Trust in Christ.
As a child who grew up in a home where both parents were emotionally and physically abusing to each other, I’m still grateful that they never divorced. I am convinced that even in unstable environments divorce would have been worse for us as children. I’m still dealing with the scars of the trauma that happened to me but I think it’s easier to work through than a divorce would have been.
I'm not. As a child, I felt guilty for my own existence and wished that my mother had had an abortion so she wouldn't have been stuck marrying my father. My brothers were so scarred by their relationship that they never married despite having multiple children.
@ I too felt guilty for my own existence as it was a regular occurrence that my mother’s pregnancy with me was brought up as to why they were together. I sympathize. I just don’t think divorce would have made it better for me and having a home where my father and mother were not divorced was better than the alternative. I’m sorry for your pain.
@@Charlotte_Martel That's definitely one of the reasons sexual intercourse is an exclusive right for married couples and otherwise a sin. Sorry you had to go through it, and hope you overcame the challenge. God bless.
You have my sympathy for enduring that. I can only comment on a personal experience that is somewhat on the peripheral. I had a mentor in the military that was in a marriage like that. It was this sick twisted Tit for Tat and his comment always was the only good thing that came out of his marriage was his kids but they would not get divorced because they're Catholic and that's wrong plus he was not giving her a significant chunk of his retirement. I was a pallbearer at his funeral a couple of years ago wife was never mentioned in the obituary and was not there but they were still married. 🙄 He had a girlfriend who was about the age of his kids and wife had something going on a well. I was warned by a colleague to stay very clear of the wife because she would definitely try to put the moves on me if she thought it would upset him and piss him off.
I wish this topic was recognized more. It was really hard, trying to decide to leave my marriage when it became physically violent. I finally talked to my priest. He determined that my marriage was not valid in the eyes of the church and that I was actually living in a state of mortal sin and should not be receiving communion. I don't recall that he told me to leave, but I remember he was supportive and understanding of my situation. I still am unclear on what the church says about leaving abusive marriages.
Canon Law talks about this. If there is immediate danger where delaying leaving is harmful, one can leave. If not immediate, must bring this issue to your priest/bishop: "A spouse who occasions grave danger of soul or body to the other or to the children, or otherwise makes the common life unduly difficult, provides the other spouse with a reason to leave, either by a decree of the local ordinary [e.g., bishop] or, if there is danger in delay, even on his or her own authority. (CIC 1153)"
The Church permits separation in such cases, even civil divorce. However, you are not permitted to marry someone else if you already have a valid marriage.
@@BrewMeister27it's wild how you can go into marriage full of honesty, have your spouse gradually become abusive, leave for legitimate reasons, and and still can't get married to someone who treats you with respect. The idea of being married to your abuser for life is wild
Love this! We need to see this from the child's point of view, the children are watching and witnessing the actions of adults. Thank you for your testimony!!!
Your videos have been so so good recently! If these past couple of videos you've uploaded have been the product of your prioritizing your online ministry, I must tell you it's really paid off. Great work!
@@introvertedcat2021 right. That's his point in the video. If some protestant interpretations were right then logically it would dissolve the marriage which Jesus clearly didn't intend
Yes God hates divorce Malachi 2:16, but it is allowed Deuteronomy 24, especially if the person is unfaithful Mathew 5:32, 19:9. Being physically abused would also qualify for leaving your spouse.
Adult "child of divorce" here. The disunity from that decision never stops. I have whole chapters of my childhood that are just gone bc of multiple marriages and multiple divorces. I thank God my own children will never know this pain.
Some actions, good and bad can have permanent effects. Like how baptism leaves an indelible, that is irremovable, mark on the soul. Marriage has a similar effect, though it only lasts for the earthly lives of the spouses. Sinning against marriage does not suddenly destroy that which was binding just as apostatizing cannot remove the fact that you were baptized.
If you have no intention to stop living in sin then you have not repented. You can't just say sorry, but I still intend to carry on with an adulterous relationship.
People opposing this seem to reject the simple yet hard truth that we as Christians are supposed to sacrifice our whole life in complete faithfulness to God, whether married or celibate. Life is not supposed to be easy and comfortable. We're supposed to emulate Martyrs. Remember this when you pray "Your will be done".
The sad reality is that annulments are granted to the vast majority of Catholics that petition for one. Yes there's paperwork and red tape involved, but it's not particularly thorough and the "psychic incapacity" grounds is exploited like crazy.
Millions of men returned from the two world wars with what is now recognised as post traumatic stress. Many were on a short fuse, or alcoholics, or depressive or violent, and impossible to live with. Divorce rates shot up in the 1950s. We are still paying the price.
Excellent points and reflection! The strongest support in the Bible for family and marriage (and therefor against divorce) that I have read is in the Book of Genesis. When Adam and Eve lost Paradise, Adam could have blamed Eve and Eve could have blamed Adam. Losing Paradise seems to be high on the list to justify hardening of one's heart. But instead they accepted their mutual responsibility. They clung steadfast to each other. They rededicated themselves to God. Together they would experience sorrows and joys as they began our journey back to God and His love!
My parents stayed together because they were Catholic, while we were young, but they fought, it seems to me all the time. I had similar confusion to you of how to love two that brought me into the world that seemed to have so much hatred between themselves. It still haunts me to this day. I'm in my fifties now...I did get a serious illness when I was a teenager that interfered with my work and my sense of being a valid relationship option too so I'm a mess.
I married for love and made full commitment to my husband and never thought that I would think of divorce and I thought he wanted the same. After 22 years of marriage and three children I want a divorce because of the trauma he caused me and my children by his infidelities, lies, deceit and emotional and psychological abuse. I became his doormat and it took me a long time to figure out what was really happening and that I was abused. I am a devout catholic wife who loves Jesus and the decision to divorce I did not take lightly. It also came after consulting with my priest. My husband’s behavior and actions did not change and it got just worse and he shows no accountability and empathy for what he did to me and our family.
My parents divorced and remarried and it left me mentally scared and traumatized. I'm just letting you know what will happen to your kids. If you are separated and you discuss this with your children it may help them.
Annulment. Someone who does not commit to their marital vows and does not believe in getting their spouse to heaven is essentially an apostate spouse. Someone who is unrepentant in the most grave ways towards their own spouse clearly does not love God.
No one should have to put up with infidelity - I do get his point though about it could be used as copout to get out a marriage. Want a divorce? - just cheat and it is sorted!
@jorgepenaloza6834 unrepentant mortal sin towards your spouse is grounds for annulment. Marriage is a sacrament. Withholding disclosure of grave risk to your Sacramento marriage and even lying to yourself about your capacity to fulfill your vows is different from remorseful fits of Rage. Someone has to be capable of repentance and your conscience should be aligned with the church
A contract that can be broken at will by either party is not a true contract. It's Nothing. It should be a binding 3 way contract between only 3 parties, man, woman and God. The family court doesn't respect the sacredness of the contract $$
When I discovered Christianity, I also found this to be very persuasive the Catholics were right especially when it came to comparing to the Eastern Orthodox churches.
@@harrygarris6921Hi. In a divorce the topic is about a legal marriage being dissolved. One that is valid in the eyes of God unto bodily death. The Annulment in the catholic sense means that the "marriage" never happened to begin with, ergo for example one of the two entered into it by force. God would have never accepted such circumstances. Such a case of union would be rendered null and void from the start so it never was. So a different thing all together than comparing it to the breaking the vows of a valid marriage.
@@harrygarris6921 In theory, they are quite different. An annulment can only consider the couple's situation prior to marriage whereas divorce is usually a response to behavior that occurred within marriage. But in practice, annulments are being treated like Catholic divorce. I spoke to a priest about this and he said a culture with a distorted view of marriage is going to have many invalid marriages. But in that case, should the Church be more selective in the couples it chooses to marry? That's a tough prudential question to answer. During my marriage prep, we were required to attend a retreat about marriage. It was apparent most of the couples in attendance were there to appease their parents and had no intention of forming a Catholic family or being truly open to life.
If divorce/remarriage is permissible in cases of infidelity it creates a morally contradictory framework where unfaithful spouses have the "privilege" of access to divorce, while faithful spouses who want to get divorced can't, because they haven't committed adultery.
That's utterly illogical - talking about it as if it was a loophole. Adultery is an extreme sin that kills the marriage. In many languages adultery has the literal meaning of "breaking the marriage". Also, the second marriage in Orthodoxy is not a real marriage. The Church Fathers mention it constantly.
Perhaps God looks at the unfaithful spouse not as having "privilege to the access of divorce" but as getting to bear the full measure of their own sins.
Thank you....we have been slowly going thru this long and difficult journey as remarried Catholics, we remain outside of communion, confession and have started the tribunal process we leave in Gods hands.
Barring something crazy, you're statistically likely to be granted an annulment. However, if you really believe that the sacrament is ministered between two people and you are one of them, then that's a different story, regardless of what any tribunal says.
Every case is different. A couple that stays together "for the sake of the children" but presents those children with constant mutual animosity and strife can cause far more harm to the children than if they would separate.
Think about it though, separation (barring physical danger) is sure to create new suffering while likely not curing the animosity. If your spouse is such a "horrible person", would you want your children to go to their house alone every other weekend? Additionally, you will have zero control over any new romances that could negatively effect your children, which by the way, there is a high rate of sexual abuse. They'll have two homes to straddle along with a loss of identity, among many other terrible effects, of which no amount of double birthdays or extra Christmas toys will be worth. Would you want to live in two homes? Not only that, but studies have shown that if you just hang in there, many marital issues resolve within a year and a half.
That is way if there is no other solution you can sepárate... But you can't re marry... And sometimes time and healing and growth and forgiveness bring couples together before the end...
Matthew 19 could not be any clearer. If a wife cheats on her husband, the man is free to divorce and remarry, meanwhile the woman may never marry again. The law of the marriage applies to the aldulterer but not to the blameless one. Idk how you miss this, the passage is of the upmost clarity. It's like a penance, if you commit adultery your penance is to never again marry, but that penance does not apply to the faithfult spouse. How does the "church" that literally (and I mean literally, look at Matthew 4:17 in the Latin Vulgate) replaced repentance with penance not understand this.
I don't see how not being allowed to remarry within the church is in any way a punishment. The church won't let you marry your lover? Who cares? You were fornicating with them anyway. This would only have any bearing on someone who actually regretted cheated and wanted to remain part of the church.
But if the unfaithful spouses repent of his/her sin, Would he or she be free to remarry if the offended part have already contracted a blessed second union? If you say no I think It would contradictory and injust.
@rdrdmaster5378 What's the contradiction. If an unfaithful spouse repents, then the fruit of that repentance is the acceptance that they must now either reconcile their marriage if possible, or live a single life, in accordance with the teachings of the Lord.
@@crazyb1ch "This would only have any bearing on someone who actually regretted cheated and wanted to remain part of the church." Um, yeah.... There's not a single commandment or teaching of Jesus that has any bearing on any unrepented soul with no desire to be in the Church. Of course people outside the the Church are to enslave themselves to their sinful desires! So, what exactly is your point?
And this is one major reason why MGTOW is growing. If you aren't allowed to replace toxic spouses with good spouses, better to go through life spouseless. You can't lose the game if you don't play it.
The Roman Catholic Church is not the only church that has a traditional stance on divorce. The Eastern Orthodox Church only allows divorce for 3 things: Adultery, abuse and abandonment. The Oriental Orthodox Church takes it a step further only allowing divorce for adultery. Abandonment is the easiest to prove, and the rules for abuse are kind of strict. For instance, if the spouse is only abusive when under the influence of alcohol, then the priest may forbid that spouse from consuming alcohol in order to try and save the marriage. According to Pew Research, roughly 34% of Roman Catholics in the U.S. get divorced. For Orthodox Christians that number is about 9%. Frankly I feel that both numbers are very high, even though they are well below Protestant Christians at 51%. All in all, it does appear that the further away a couple gets from traditional roles, the more likely that they will get divorced. I think this also speaks to couples not fully discussing what they expect of each other, and what they expect and want for their lives. Interestingly, couples that actually attend church together frequently are less likely to get divorced vs. people that claim to be a religion and rarely ever go. As to the way that I read Mattew 5:31 - 5:32, it seems that Jesus was basically saying that if you divorce and remarry, you are committing adultery. If you were the one that had a spouse cheat on you, you might be able to get a divorce by this interoperation, but if you remarry are you now committing adultery against your previous spouse, and are you possibly causing your new spouse to become an adulterer being if they themselves were married before?
Whoever told you that was ignorant. Annulments are very old and established in the church. It's a declaration that a previous relationship was not a valid marriage. They were usually necessary when women were abducted and forced to marry (thus why it's still mention in canon law). The more prominent cases are the ones we have specific historical evidence for deal with nobility go as far back as the 9th century A.D. Though the abuse of the nullification process in the last 20 or so years is troubling, this is not some made up 20th century phantasy.
Hey! Annulment has existed in the church for a long time, and a famous example of that is King Henry the 8th in the protestant reformation who wanted an annulment that the Pope wouldn't grant to him. Annulment has roots long before that instance as well. Divorce is the dissolving of a marriage, which is obviously impossible. Annulment goes back to the original sacrament and investigates whether the sacrament was actually done properly. Most importantly, Annulment studies whether the two participants were free to give themselves to one another, because if one or both of them were coerced into the marriage then the sacrament itself isn't valid.
@@dyzmadamachus9842 I agree annulments existed for a long time, but they were extremely rare. Before Vatican 2 in the U.S. there were less than 100 a year, some years less than 10 ! Now there are 10,000 plus !! I have personally known people who were married with children, then got divorced, & received annulments and remarried with the Novus Ordo “blessing “ We have to face reality. The modernists use annulments as an end run around divorce & remarriage. In PRACTICE the modern church does in fact allow not only divorce & remarriage, but many other degenerate moral outrages, such as contraception, co- habitation, homosexual “unions”, … pretty much whatever the latest nonsense the left wing is pushing , the modernists will find a loophole, or just simply ignore Traditional moral teachings, and say they are being “pastoral “
There’s only one Catholic Church. If you add any description to Catholic and stop following your local Bishop who is in union with the Pope you are now Protestant. Lutherans, Anglicans, Presbyterians, Old Catholics, etc were all started by Catholic priests who claimed Rome was not pure enough or required reform.
In the Lutheran LCMS Church we're even more strict than RCC. Divorce isn't even allowed for cheating. Barring physical abuse is it permitted. I'm not sure if even it's truly a Church-based divorce or if it's considered in the legal sense.
Bizarre. Luther’s Spouse neither cheated on him nor abused him, and yet he still divorced Her. He was an Augustinian monk who took vows of chastity and obedience to the Church.
@@jonathansmith4712 Luther isn't a pope or equivalent in Lutheranism. It's important to note, it is the Bible that leads us, not Luther. Luther, like all of us, is not beyond reproach.
@@swesleyc7 That’s not what I’m saying at all. As a monk, Luther was already married to the Church and then ran off and “married” a nun who was already married to Christ.
The family is important, but I am quite sensitive when the church barely speaks about domestic violence. For example, in Colombia domestic violence is everywhere. And they have the family as a high value there. Colombia is very conservative. But the priests there barely speak (if ever) about domestic violence, and as a result is kind of acceptable in the culture. I don't think it is consistent with the Gospel ignoring this issue.
Not all non-sacramental marriages are unlawful. My own marriage falls into that category. My wife is not baptized, so I had to obtain a dispensation from the bishop to marry her. I got the dispensation, and the priest officiated. Because my my wife is not baptized, our marriage is NOT a sacrament. It is considered a "natural" marriage, and I am permitted to receive the sacraments of the church. Curiously, because she is not baptized, I could--theoretically--petition the holy see to obtain "the privilege of the faith" (a.k.a. the Petrine Privilege) to dissolve my marriage. Crazy, huh?
I dont think you can obtain ''the privilege of the faith'' since You entered to your marriage with a dispensation from your bishop, so it is a valid marriage and you knew your wife was not baptized before married her. The ''privilege of the faith'' can be use only if you are not catholic, marry and then you convert to the faith but your spouse (who is not catholic) dont do it.
There needs to be some way out of a abusive or cruel marriage but also the commitment needs to be for life through thick or thin. Tricky where to draw the line in some cases as everyone behaves badly sometimes but where does the occasional bad behaviour tip over into an abusive situation. Adultery seems more clear cut but even after divorce (even if not religious) are they really separate? I know couples still living together or still caring for ill spouses even after no longer being together. Clear rules about what is/isn't acceptable behaviour would help but those have gone completely out the window in secular society.
I get your argument and if it wasn't for the way certain jurisdictions seem to dole out annulments I would believe you. Life is messy, people should be expected to take their marriages seriously, but when a repentant convert has already made a mess of their life, they are already deep into a second marriage, have small children by this new marriage, and maybe their spouse is not Catholic so not under the authority of the church's demands to live a celibate life what is supposed to happen. This type of situation is the reason the Catholic church allows for annulment, but it is a bureaucratic fiction that any inconvenient earlier marriages can just be waved away as not sacramental. It's especially unfair to children of annulled marriages who are unilaterally declared illegitimate by the church. Whatever the church claims otherwise.
The godly ideal is faithful marriage between one man and one woman for life, with the fruit of the Spirit expressed within the marriage between both partners. The failure of marriages to meet that ideal is, of course, because of human brokenness. However, should a marriage fail, then according to NT counsel, a believer should not remarry unless the other partner has already done so. He/she should remain single and focus on works of helpfulness toward others, to the glory of the Lord. When any of us fail to live up to the godly standards in any way, with contrite heart let us ask the Lord's forgiveness, for he is faithful so as to forgive. (1 John 1: 9)
"The only church left standing" Sir, let me introduce you to Eastern Orthodoxy. You know, the church the Roman Catholics separated from when they wanted to change doctrine in the year 1154 also known as the Great Schism. Still standing twice as long.
Hello! I pray 3 rosaries a day! Is that enough or is it maybe too much? It takes me around 15 minutes or up to 20 minutes to pray 1 holy rosary. So, 1 hour of prayer a day or even less. Do you think this is a good foundation alongside going to Sunday Mass? I also want to go to the confession but I am afraid to do so because of my po*n addiction and I feel shame.
Go to Confession. No prayer can make up for that. It is the sacrament that brings you again to the state of grace. And do not think of your prayer in this way. More prayer doesn’t necessarily bring you closer to God, it’s not about the number of prayers or the time you spend praying.
You are doing well, my friend... But Don't be shame all of us are sinners, and we need a doctor our Loord Jesus christ, confession is a kind of soul cleaner, that because of our Lord's mercy help us in the fight against of those kinds of addictions, and don't be afraid of falling again that is normal, because our Lord Jesus not just will declare you rightgeous, he will make you rightgeous... He will transform you and that process is painful, don't be afraid just be faithful... Go to confession that is going to heal You...
I went to confession multiple times a week for years for that same sin. I’ve now been clean for 8 months, due in large part to Confession. Don’t give up, Christ has grace waiting for you in the sacrament of confession.
I dont believe Jesus is saying that adultry nullifys a marriage. He is saying that adultery is the only justification for divorce. If you divorce, you are divorced, whether or not you should have. If you remarry, you remarry, whether or not you should have.
Confessional Lutherans believe in binding and loosing sins. We have confession and absolution and haven't changed on divorce. The only reason we have a different number of sacraments is because we define them as the means of the forgiveness of sins.
I grew up Lutheran and nobody ever talked about confession. One day I asked a pastor if we had something similar to the Catholic sacrament of reconciliation and he said they did. To this day I talk to Lutherans in their old age who never heard of such a thing and I realize that it's never been important to them even in light of Lutheran theology. Same with divorce and remarriage: they couldn't care less and, say, an LCMS pastor will just remarry anyone and never inquire into the previous marriage. This is just my experience and I mean no disrespect. I still go to Lutheran services with family but I've long since moved on. God bless you, brother.
Luther said God doesn't care. He gave permission for Philip of Hess to take a 2nd wife. He said he could commit adultry 1000 x day and it wouldn't matter.
@@jayguevara6153I agree with you. I think it's unacceptable. The congregations aren't going to naturally do what is right. Not to be crass but I think one of the biggest reasons why the LCMS is often indistinguishable from evangelicals in areas is that pastors need to grow a pair and fear God not men. A pastor is a shepherd of your soul not your buddy.
My personal opinion on marriage is this, divorce should be allowed in cases where the martial vows or the spirit of marriage is being violated. For example, I consider a husband abusing the wife and kids to be a violation of marriage as the husband is supposed to protect and care for them, not hurt them. Thus divorce should be allowed in such cases. This might not be the Christian view on marriage, but I can't in good conscience, as someone who came from an abusive household, be against people divorcing because the marriage is abusive. No fault divorce should absolutely be abolished though.
The Catholic Church permits separation and civil divorce in such cases. However, the couple is still married in the eyes of God and cannot pursue another spouse.
Jesus taught to take marriage seriously and not something to take lightly. You make a covenant to God when you say your vows "till death do us apart" people lack control, respect, honor nowadays. Jesus said let your yes be yes and your no be no
Wait, a marriage can be valid but not sacramental. My wife is not baptized (yet! She is on the way HOME!) but we are married in the eyes of the Church but the marriage is not sacramental. This is what I have been told by my very traditional priests.
Divorce is forbidden, if a couple separates their only options are get back together or be celibate for the rest of their lives, remarried divorced people should not be allowed communion and the remedy for their condition is to end their adulterous relationship with their current "spouse" if two men got "married" we would insist they separate in repentance, why would we have a lessor standard for a couple living in adultery?
From what I understand, marriages between two baptized Christians of any stripe contract a sacramental marriage. Otherwise I think its simply a natural marriage which doesn't convey the grace of the sacrament.
I agree with you regarding the logical impossibility of Christ offering adultery as an exception to the no-divorce rule. However, I'm having trouble with your alternative interpretation of Matthew 19. If Christ was speaking specifically about illicit marriages (those created only by man, not by God), would it even be necessary to bring up "unlawful sexual conduct"? It seems it would be sufficient to say that any unlawful marriage can be dissolved. I find the plain meaning words to be the most favorable most of the time, and this alternative interpretation where Christ uses a general term to speak to a very specific scenario seems a bit of a leap to me.
We can talk forever about the laws of man, and biblical commands etc etc. But in the end if a marriage fails with no hope of reconciliation, then what is a couple to do? Stay together, for Gods sake, for society sake. Surly, support, understanding and God given love and compassion is the way to go. What is the point of staying together. In ancient Ireland before the christian era, according to the then Brehon Law, a young couple could stay together for one year as a trial - if it worked they stayed together, if not separate.
One person changing the way they react or defend themselves from the other has been known to help in the dynamic of the couple in a marriage. It helps in the beginning of restoration and and remember why you married each other. Many examples of this out there. That is part of the point of there being no exceptions for divorce. If people are not looking for a way out or a "loophole" because they think it's somewhere in the bible, they may be forced to fix their relationship if they don't want to live in a bit of a hell. Having hard conversations, boundaries, and commitment and a strategy helps, I am speaking from experience.
You can't invoke God to justify illicit, sinful behavior. This nullification of the gospel to justify degeneracy has resulted in the collapse of western society.
I would argue, as many more intelligent than I, that sexual immorality, or porneia in the Greek, can NOT be a reference to adultery on the basis that if adultery were discovered in a first century Jewish marriage, or any Jewish marriage all the way back to Moses, the marriage would end immediately, not through a bill of divorce, but rather by the death of the offending party by stoning. How can Jesus be saying that an act which carries with it the death penalty is an acceptable justification for divorce? I would argue rather, as many have, that this reference to sexual immorality is one of invalid marriages that should never have been joined in the eyes of God at their onset. Such unions would include those between prohibited relatives, as we know St. John the Baptist argued against Herrod taking as his wife, his own sister-in-law. Also included would be Brothers and sisters, uncles and nieces, as many of the surrounding pagan cultures, deemed acceptable, but which went against God’s law for Israel.
Haven't finished the video..but I'm confused on the contradiction? You can only get divorced if there was adultery So if there isn't adultery and you "get divorced" and remarry = adultery If you wife cheats on you and you get divorced and remarry= not adultery. Where is the contradiction here?
It isn't as simple as that. This is beyond the scope of a simple message but I suggest that you watch Sam Shamoun's live session that he did yesterday. One of the questions that a caller asked was regarding divorce and really, it is REALLY complicated. The best answer is to stick with what your particular church allows you to do. The live session in question is 'JEROME, RELIC VENERATION & OPEN Q&A' and the question is asked at about 1:50:00 mark and the explanation is lengthy.
But what dissolves the marriage, adultery itself or the decision of the offended party to dissolve it? If it is the decision of the person, can that person make the decision without the approval and consent of the church? If the approval of the church is needed, is the church obligated to give it or can the church deny it if she has already decided? If what dissolves the marriage is adultery itself, then do the spouses have to divorce no matter what if the adultery occurred, regardless of whether there is forgiveness? Remember that we are talking about divorce and not separation. Divorce is understood to mean that the marriage is terminated and the person is free to marry again, while with separation alone, the person is not free to marry again.
You are saying that if one remarries they are eternally condemned by perpetual adultery and cannot be forgiven, or cleansed by the blood of Jesus. This is not biblical you can be forgiven however it is a complex issue and as a Protestant I can agree that the Catholic teaching reinforces the gravity of these decisions.
Jesus making an exception is not a contradiction. Some might even say that an exception going against what was previously stated is the defining attribute of an exception lol.
I have no idea what you're claiming here Brian. If a priest presided at a marriage sacrament to a couple, the Church can't go back later and say "it wasn't valid in the first place".
you know what, I think this video is not your best work. There is historical president of pagan marriages being recognised as the pagans convert, and yet by your own arguments that makes an invalided marriage. there are plenty of other things people are giving off about, so I think perhaps this one is worth revisiting in the future
I would not exactly call the widespread liberalism in your Vatican as standing firm. This general liberalism seems to have been implemented and trickled down widely (atleast in the new mass Novus Ordo realm). Francis has had sundry major controversies including FS same sex blessings, various issues with the Synod on Synodality, pluralism, syncretism, globalism, liberation theology etc. Even most recently he taught in Singapore that all religions are pathways to God. I even heard a Catholic admit online recently that conservative Protestantism is more orthodox than the state of affairs in Catholicism!
I would need you to clarify further. If your second marriage is adulterous it is BECAUSE your first marriage exists. Therefore your adultery is in direct opposition and an offense to your existing marriage and spouse. Your second marriage is doing something TO that original marriage; the original marriage is what is impacted by the adultery. You are committing adultery AGAINST your original/existing spouse. Adultery is justification for divorce, end of story. The sketchy scenario is actually annulment. Finding “some fault” with your spouse, then putting them away (saying the marriage was never valid is a pretty convenient loophole). In that case I would not say that the Catholic Church is the only one left standing, but perhaps the first to fall. NOW in my opinion, the spouse that initiates an unjustified divorce and then commits adultery by remarrying (or having intercourse with another) is the offending party in the matter, thus making the victimized spouse “free”. In the Bible, is there instruction to divorce second spouses and remarry first spouses? If not, then that might point to the new marriage bearing some type of legitimacy I am very open to enlightenment on this topic. I’m only asking for you to clarify further.
It makes no sense that one spouse is free to marry and the other is not. I think that at least one has to admit that the offender is free to marry if the offended party exercises his “right” to marry again and he (the offender) has repented of having sinned. And this is so because if the offended spouse does marry, then once he or she remarries then the first marriage ceases to exist for the offender as well. The contradiction would be in saying “The offender is no longer married and yet cannot remarry.”
Ah there is the confusion I think. It’s true that the offender cannot be beholden to an original marriage once it is voided (which is your take), but that’s completely different than saying the offender sinned, thus the marriage can be ended (which is my take). I think these two concepts can be very easily conflated. It may be helpful to think of it this way: if you steal from me, why should I then go to jail? Requiring the victim spouse to stay in bondage to a husband she can’t marry -because he is married to another-seems like an illogical punishment (but if God wants it that way, then so be it, as we are under His authority). I’m just saying a person cannot just spread that adultery in one sense can’t end a marriage when the Bible says that it does. (again if I can no longer marry my spouse, then that must not be my spouse, for how can I not marry someone I’m already married to?). And also it would be helpful to explain why it’s biblically okay that annulments get a pass).
So you agree that once the party offended by the infidelity enters into a new marriage, the offender (the adulterer) is free to marry? (My position is that adultery does not dissolve the marriage bond nor is it a reason for its dissolution and therefore neither of the two is free to marry again although the offended spouse is free to seek separation.) Annulments should only be granted if it is discovered that the marriage had a defect of form and/or substance. A defect of form would be, for example, if they got married on the beach without the bishop's dispensation to do so. A defect of substance would be, for example, if the husband was forced to marry by the wife's father because he had gotten her pregnant or if the wife was a drug addict and somehow managed to hide that information from the husband until after the marriage had been consummated so the husband did not have relevant information to give his consent to the marriage. It can also be done if it is proven that in some way one (or both) of the spouses did not have the mental capacity, the mental state or in general the psychological freedom to consent to the marriage, but in this case the word of the spouses should not be enough, but there should be written proof or at least three valid witnesses who can attest that this was the case. Another example, if someone marries someone with the intention of divorcing a couple of years later to take away half of the other person's assets, it is clear that it was not a valid marriage and can be annulled. Annulments do not contradict the Bible because the marriage never really existed, in fact, whoever receives an annulment does not receive an "annulment", they receive a "declaration of nullity" which declares that what seemed like a marriage was not really one.
@@rdrdmaster5378 I think the offending party is always going to be the party “at fault”. Yes we are all “free to sin” because we have free will. In that case it is possible that a distinction needs to be made between being “free” to do something and being “justified” in doing something. As for annulments, they are just not biblical, ALTHOUGH the points you made regarding annulments seem really legit, in my opinion, and you did a good job explaining those scenarios.
A contract that can be broken at will by either party is not a true contract. It's Nothing. It should be a binding 3 way contract between only 3 parties, man, woman and God. The family court doesn't respect the sacredness of the contract $$
What about a married couple outside the Church, or even outside Christianity? Like a Hindu or Muslim couple? Are these not considered lawful marriage under divinely inspired human laws (so long as it’s one man and one woman)? Or is this considered fornication, since it’s “marriage” that is “outside” the Church?
The Catholics are against divorce? In the bible Jesus allows divorce only for unfaithfulness, which is good, thank God. It is not good to remain in a marriage if there’s no love, this leads to abuse, violence and even murder in many cases. If there’s no God, love of God, fear of God, love for His word and obedience to His word, no fear of God and His judgments, from both husband and wife, if not the children grow up confused unloved no guidance and good example, they grow up to be abusive and ungodly.
WHEN JESUS CHRIST IS HERE. all will see who is who in THE CHURCH and THE CHURCH IT'S SELF . This will tell as Judgement Day will......COME LORDJESUS❤AMEN!
BUT IT IS NOT "STANDING FIRM." Every Christian SECT and every SECT within a SECT, has it's unique derived EXCUSES for "divorce." EVERY ... SINGLE .... ONE.
If I had it to do over again, if I knew then what I know now, I would have gotten a divorce. The Bible makes provision for divorce because God is not cruel. Even He divorced Israel (Jeremiah 3:8). Ecclesiastes 7:16 warns us, "Do not be overly righteous, nor be overly wise: why should you destroy yourself?" You really shouldn't be using the Bible because you don't understand it.
Christ abrogated the old testament law. If you need to separate, then separate but you are not allowed to divorce and remarry without the church first giving you an annulment.
@@loriw.9653 Prove it! Show me the Scripture where Jesus told us to not keep the Law or ignore the Old Testament. What I've read is where He said in the Sermon on the Mount, "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the Law till all is fulfilled." Matthew 5:17-18 The funny part is that even in the Old Testament time people were claiming that God's Law was abolished: "It is time for You to act, O Lord, For they have regarded Your Law as void." Psalm 119:126 You can always count on Satan to dig into the same old bag of tricks
Great video! Please do some commentary on the annulment crisis in the Catholic Church. I am a convert from the Orthodox Church. My own divorce in the Orthodox Church is why I am Catholic today. My ex wife was ‘remarried’ in the same Orthodox parish 10 months after the divorce was official. It’s been several years and I still haven’t applied for an annulment. I heard there are approx 50,000 annulments in the Catholic Church each year in the US alone. There were only like 50 globally in around 1900. I feel like I cannot trust the tribunals decision, especially if they grant the annulment. Some diocese have a 90%+ approval rate. I would love to hear your thoughts.
many thanks. Without Jesus's "but I say to you" being present today the Incarnation is nullified. Virtual silence on this from the pulpit is failure to preach the Gospel.
Just because a couple goes up to the Altar and a Priest marries them doesn't mean God has joined them! If its a marriage of convenience or one of them's heart isn't there at all then God knows and it's just called a "Farse"! For God to join them in this situation is simple wrong! God is not to be mocked! God joins ONLY those who's hearts are there in Love! God bless all and I'm open to correction!
Since this is about 💍Marriage/Divorce, I need to send a warning because judgement day is filled with people people that took God's Law lightly and expect another warning (reference Luke 16:28) ... WARNING: Do NOT go to a marriage *ceremony that involves formerly divorced "Christians" getting married, without first assuring the legal context of their previous divorce is worth you being COMPLICIT in their "Christian" marriage‼ If it's a pagan that is different however.... if it is a "Christian" (as in they bear the title - let alone if it be actually Catholic), there is HIGHER judgement - do NOT corrupt the title of "Christian" . If Catholics give over the word and Protestants give over the word - the meaning of the word "Christian" is given over to Satan's 😈power (may God judge you for that😡)
Adult Child of divorced parents here. It never ends. Every holiday, special event, every milestone is divided. It even impacts my kids. Always having to strategize and make sure no one is offended or offensive or feel lefft out. It never ends.
When I was going through marriage prep, a priest told me to truly consider the marriage vows. He said that people usually only consider the first part of "for better or for worse." But you're actually vowing to remain married even if your spouse causes financial ruin, becomes chronically ill, or even objectively makes your life worse. It was quite sobering.
But "objectively making your life worse" includes abuse and the church I'd against that
@@dominictafoya2205 Abuse does not dissolve a marriage. Though separation may be necessary for your safety, you are not free to marry someone else.
Many woman saints put up with an abusive spouse @@dominictafoya2205
The church is against that and you can separate, but you are still married! @@dominictafoya2205
@@dominictafoya2205 this doesn't mean the Church is for allowing divorce. It's merely a warning as to how serious the union is. Conversations about marriage naturally include all possibilities inside that relationship. Both the absolute worst and the absolute best simultaneously.
The Orthodox Church holds marriage sacred as well. I ask young people today, 'what does marriage mean?' The answer I get most of the time is, 'I don't know.' That is a failure on everyone's part. We have allowed entertainment to define our culture for far too long. I've also heard people say they just aren't happy anymore. What does that mean? People are expected to dance on a razor's edge the entire relationship hoping you wake up happy every single day? Ridiculous. When you marry, there's a third person in that marriage, Jesus.
Truth ☦️
Orthodox are ok with birth control though, aren't they?
The Orthodox Church allows divorce?
The schismatics allow divorce. Next.
@@Rocky-nj8lk Well, that's a difficult issue. Officially, "the Orthodox Church" (though actually there is no unified opinion on this in Orthodoxy, as on many issues) only recognizes the first marriage as such. But it does have an liturgical rite for the second marriage (officially called a penitetial rite, though the ones I've seen were anything but penitential, actually were the normal marriage rites). And furthermore, it depends on the nation's liturgical traditions, some predominantly Orthodox countries are stricter than others. After haveing done the "penitential rite", the second marriage is fully accepted in Church life and the couple can receive the sacraments like anybody else.
I was so young when I divorced. Looking back 30+ years ago, I realize how fully selfish and blind I was. I had kids! I had NO RIGHT to leave. But I did, and hurt so many. Many many many tears would follow.
Doing more than the bare minimum is a mentality that should be applied to any loving relationship. It's disingenuous to say "I love you" when you consistently put in the lowest effort possible, rather than wondering how you can strengthen such bonds.
Nevertheless, "Plastic Love" is still quite good...
I was 'married' to an abuser for 20 years, i stayed because i took my vows seriously, but in the end i feared for my life and the safety of my children. I separated and he divorced me. My case is currently being reviewd by the marriage tribunal, but regardless of the outcome i cannot imagine attempting marriage again.
I am sorry for the pain you underwent by the person you committed your life to. I hope that you find peace and comfort in God.
Annulment is a thing
The Church has far too many modernists and bishops who have no faith in your ability or God's grace to keep you chaste. There are saints who were sanctified by situations like yours. Trust in Christ.
@@paolomartinelli345 Annulments have been wildly abused since Vatican II.
I hope your children are doing well now
As a child who grew up in a home where both parents were emotionally and physically abusing to each other, I’m still grateful that they never divorced. I am convinced that even in unstable environments divorce would have been worse for us as children. I’m still dealing with the scars of the trauma that happened to me but I think it’s easier to work through than a divorce would have been.
I'm not. As a child, I felt guilty for my own existence and wished that my mother had had an abortion so she wouldn't have been stuck marrying my father. My brothers were so scarred by their relationship that they never married despite having multiple children.
@ I too felt guilty for my own existence as it was a regular occurrence that my mother’s pregnancy with me was brought up as to why they were together. I sympathize. I just don’t think divorce would have made it better for me and having a home where my father and mother were not divorced was better than the alternative. I’m sorry for your pain.
@@Charlotte_Martel That's definitely one of the reasons sexual intercourse is an exclusive right for married couples and otherwise a sin. Sorry you had to go through it, and hope you overcame the challenge. God bless.
You have my sympathy for enduring that. I can only comment on a personal experience that is somewhat on the peripheral. I had a mentor in the military that was in a marriage like that. It was this sick twisted Tit for Tat and his comment always was the only good thing that came out of his marriage was his kids but they would not get divorced because they're Catholic and that's wrong plus he was not giving her a significant chunk of his retirement.
I was a pallbearer at his funeral a couple of years ago wife was never mentioned in the obituary and was not there but they were still married. 🙄
He had a girlfriend who was about the age of his kids and wife had something going on a well. I was warned by a colleague to stay very clear of the wife because she would definitely try to put the moves on me if she thought it would upset him and piss him off.
I wish this topic was recognized more.
It was really hard, trying to decide to leave my marriage when it became physically violent. I finally talked to my priest. He determined that my marriage was not valid in the eyes of the church and that I was actually living in a state of mortal sin and should not be receiving communion. I don't recall that he told me to leave, but I remember he was supportive and understanding of my situation.
I still am unclear on what the church says about leaving abusive marriages.
Canon Law talks about this. If there is immediate danger where delaying leaving is harmful, one can leave. If not immediate, must bring this issue to your priest/bishop:
"A spouse who occasions grave danger of soul or body to the other or to the children, or otherwise makes the common life unduly difficult, provides the other spouse with a reason to leave, either by a decree of the local ordinary [e.g., bishop] or, if there is danger in delay, even on his or her own authority. (CIC 1153)"
The Church permits separation in such cases, even civil divorce. However, you are not permitted to marry someone else if you already have a valid marriage.
She says that you can separate for safety reasons, but unless your marriage is invalid, you cannot divorce.
@@BrewMeister27it's wild how you can go into marriage full of honesty, have your spouse gradually become abusive, leave for legitimate reasons, and and still can't get married to someone who treats you with respect.
The idea of being married to your abuser for life is wild
@@dominictafoya2205 Yes, which is why the Jews balked at Jesus' teaching and questioned whether people should marry at all.
Love this! We need to see this from the child's point of view, the children are watching and witnessing the actions of adults. Thank you for your testimony!!!
Your videos have been so so good recently! If these past couple of videos you've uploaded have been the product of your prioritizing your online ministry, I must tell you it's really paid off. Great work!
I never thought of remarrying being adultery which would dissolve the original marriage. That's a good point
It does not dissolve the original marriage.
It doesn’t. That’s the excuse people who divorce use. Not what Jesus meant.
@@introvertedcat2021 right. That's his point in the video. If some protestant interpretations were right then logically it would dissolve the marriage which Jesus clearly didn't intend
@@acandela1294 It's not as 'clear' as you think.
Yes God hates divorce Malachi 2:16, but it is allowed Deuteronomy 24, especially if the person is unfaithful Mathew 5:32, 19:9. Being physically abused would also qualify for leaving your spouse.
Praise be Jesus Christ! The Latin Mass has totally saved me and my family. I’ve never felt more connected to God!
Adult "child of divorce" here. The disunity from that decision never stops. I have whole chapters of my childhood that are just gone bc of multiple marriages and multiple divorces. I thank God my own children will never know this pain.
Does the Bible “allow” any sin? No. Does it allow a sinner to repent and return to the faith after having committed a sin? Yes.
But it's also a grave sin to presume on the mercy of God. There's great danger in justifying your sin because you expect God to forgive you.
Some actions, good and bad can have permanent effects. Like how baptism leaves an indelible, that is irremovable, mark on the soul. Marriage has a similar effect, though it only lasts for the earthly lives of the spouses. Sinning against marriage does not suddenly destroy that which was binding just as apostatizing cannot remove the fact that you were baptized.
If you have no intention to stop living in sin then you have not repented. You can't just say sorry, but I still intend to carry on with an adulterous relationship.
@@BrewMeister27 Yet if the sin is the choice of a former spouse, then your whistling through your hat..
People opposing this seem to reject the simple yet hard truth that we as Christians are supposed to sacrifice our whole life in complete faithfulness to God, whether married or celibate. Life is not supposed to be easy and comfortable. We're supposed to emulate Martyrs. Remember this when you pray "Your will be done".
Thank you! Absolutely!
The sad reality is that annulments are granted to the vast majority of Catholics that petition for one. Yes there's paperwork and red tape involved, but it's not particularly thorough and the "psychic incapacity" grounds is exploited like crazy.
Millions of men returned from the two world wars with what is now recognised as post traumatic stress. Many were on a short fuse, or alcoholics, or depressive or violent, and impossible to live with. Divorce rates shot up in the 1950s. We are still paying the price.
So true. War creates so much lasting damage that people don't even think about.
Yep. Wish I had known before it was too late.
Excellent points and reflection!
The strongest support in the Bible for family and marriage (and therefor against divorce) that I have read is in the Book of Genesis. When Adam and Eve lost Paradise, Adam could have blamed Eve and Eve could have
blamed Adam. Losing Paradise seems to be high on the list to justify hardening of one's heart. But instead they accepted their mutual responsibility. They clung steadfast to each other. They rededicated themselves to God. Together they would experience sorrows and joys as they began our journey back to God and His love!
My parents stayed together because they were Catholic, while we were young, but they fought, it seems to me all the time. I had similar confusion to you of how to love two that brought me into the world that seemed to have so much hatred between themselves. It still haunts me to this day. I'm in my fifties now...I did get a serious illness when I was a teenager that interfered with my work and my sense of being a valid relationship option too so I'm a mess.
Praying for healing.
I married for love and made full commitment to my husband and never thought that I would think of divorce and I thought he wanted the same. After 22 years of marriage and three children I want a divorce because of the trauma he caused me and my children by his infidelities, lies, deceit and emotional and psychological abuse. I became his doormat and it took me a long time to figure out what was really happening and that I was abused.
I am a devout catholic wife who loves Jesus and the decision to divorce I did not take lightly. It also came after consulting with my priest. My husband’s behavior and actions did not change and it got just worse and he shows no accountability and empathy for what he did to me and our family.
My parents divorced and remarried and it left me mentally scared and traumatized.
I'm just letting you know what will happen to your kids. If you are separated and you discuss this with your children it may help them.
Annulment. Someone who does not commit to their marital vows and does not believe in getting their spouse to heaven is essentially an apostate spouse. Someone who is unrepentant in the most grave ways towards their own spouse clearly does not love God.
No one should have to put up with infidelity - I do get his point though about it could be used as copout to get out a marriage. Want a divorce? - just cheat and it is sorted!
Abusiveness doesn't annull a marriage.
Otherwise mistreatment is like a DIY divorce court.
@jorgepenaloza6834 unrepentant mortal sin towards your spouse is grounds for annulment. Marriage is a sacrament. Withholding disclosure of grave risk to your Sacramento marriage and even lying to yourself about your capacity to fulfill your vows is different from remorseful fits of Rage. Someone has to be capable of repentance and your conscience should be aligned with the church
The two becoming one flesh cannot be unseen once you look at your children.
It's always a blessing to hear from you, Brian. I appreciate your reflections of theological considerations.
I’d rather see someone divorced than murdered by their spouse. Domestic abuse is real. Murder is a greater sin.
Are those the only two choices??
Fdd
@@joksal9108 In some cases, yes
Legal separation is allowed in cases of abuse, but never remarriage.
A contract that can be broken at will by either party is not a true contract. It's Nothing.
It should be a binding 3 way contract between only 3 parties, man, woman and God.
The family court doesn't respect the sacredness of the contract $$
When I discovered Christianity, I also found this to be very persuasive the Catholics were right especially when it came to comparing to the Eastern Orthodox churches.
The Catholic church is the one that came up with marriage consisting in a contract. ;-)
We don’t find the idea that an “annulment” is substantially different than a divorce compelling.
@@harrygarris6921Hi.
In a divorce the topic is about a legal marriage being dissolved. One that is valid in the eyes of God unto bodily death.
The Annulment in the catholic sense means that the "marriage" never happened to begin with, ergo for example one of the two entered into it by force. God would have never accepted such circumstances. Such a case of union would be rendered null and void from the start so it never was.
So a different thing all together than comparing it to the breaking the vows of a valid marriage.
@ I know so the response was just to have divorce rather than determining if a marriage was unlawful to see if the persons are free to marry properly
@@harrygarris6921 In theory, they are quite different. An annulment can only consider the couple's situation prior to marriage whereas divorce is usually a response to behavior that occurred within marriage. But in practice, annulments are being treated like Catholic divorce.
I spoke to a priest about this and he said a culture with a distorted view of marriage is going to have many invalid marriages. But in that case, should the Church be more selective in the couples it chooses to marry? That's a tough prudential question to answer. During my marriage prep, we were required to attend a retreat about marriage. It was apparent most of the couples in attendance were there to appease their parents and had no intention of forming a Catholic family or being truly open to life.
If divorce/remarriage is permissible in cases of infidelity it creates a morally contradictory framework where unfaithful spouses have the "privilege" of access to divorce, while faithful spouses who want to get divorced can't, because they haven't committed adultery.
That's utterly illogical - talking about it as if it was a loophole.
Adultery is an extreme sin that kills the marriage. In many languages adultery has the literal meaning of "breaking the marriage".
Also, the second marriage in Orthodoxy is not a real marriage. The Church Fathers mention it constantly.
@@2anthranilicacid In other words, adultery is stronger than God? (Grave impediments to a valid marriage is a different matter to this)
@@Waldemarvonanhalt Uh, no. But that also has nothing to do with this.
Take it up with the consensus of the Church Fathers, if you disagree with them.
the unfaithful spouses DON'T have access to it. Only the offended part could contract a blessed second union
Perhaps God looks at the unfaithful spouse not as having "privilege to the access of divorce" but as getting to bear the full measure of their own sins.
Thank you....we have been slowly going thru this long and difficult journey as remarried Catholics, we remain outside of communion, confession and have started the tribunal process we leave in Gods hands.
Then leave the cul, I mean denomination.
Barring something crazy, you're statistically likely to be granted an annulment. However, if you really believe that the sacrament is ministered between two people and you are one of them, then that's a different story, regardless of what any tribunal says.
I agree. As a married person without children, though, I wish there were more defences of lifelong marriage even where there are no kids.
In the Church, having children or not has no bearing on the validity of the marriage.
Well done! Thank you for standing up for marriage, for the Church, for our Lord.
Thanks for this Brian!
Well spoken, delivered and spoke to my heart coming from broken home…God bless you sir and keep doing the Lords work 🙏✝️
Hello, whats the intro music for all his videos? Thanks
Every case is different. A couple that stays together "for the sake of the children" but presents those children with constant mutual animosity and strife can cause far more harm to the children than if they would separate.
Irrelevant to the sacrament of marriage.
Catechism since 1960 is garbage.
Think about it though, separation (barring physical danger) is sure to create new suffering while likely not curing the animosity.
If your spouse is such a "horrible person", would you want your children to go to their house alone every other weekend? Additionally, you will have zero control over any new romances that could negatively effect your children, which by the way, there is a high rate of sexual abuse.
They'll have two homes to straddle along with a loss of identity, among many other terrible effects, of which no amount of double birthdays or extra Christmas toys will be worth. Would you want to live in two homes?
Not only that, but studies have shown that if you just hang in there, many marital issues resolve within a year and a half.
I understanding is you can separate, but you don't divorce and remarry.
The statistics disagree. Barring physical abuse, children do better if their parents stay together. Even if there's verbal abuse in the home.
That is way if there is no other solution you can sepárate... But you can't re marry... And sometimes time and healing and growth and forgiveness bring couples together before the end...
As a filipino… what is this divorce thing.
It’s when you sleep with more than 2 people in different beds a few hours apart 😀
Thanks!
Matthew 19 could not be any clearer. If a wife cheats on her husband, the man is free to divorce and remarry, meanwhile the woman may never marry again. The law of the marriage applies to the aldulterer but not to the blameless one. Idk how you miss this, the passage is of the upmost clarity.
It's like a penance, if you commit adultery your penance is to never again marry, but that penance does not apply to the faithfult spouse. How does the "church" that literally (and I mean literally, look at Matthew 4:17 in the Latin Vulgate) replaced repentance with penance not understand this.
I don't see how not being allowed to remarry within the church is in any way a punishment. The church won't let you marry your lover? Who cares? You were fornicating with them anyway. This would only have any bearing on someone who actually regretted cheated and wanted to remain part of the church.
That's what I thought too.
But if the unfaithful spouses repent of his/her sin, Would he or she be free to remarry if the offended part have already contracted a blessed second union? If you say no I think It would contradictory and injust.
@rdrdmaster5378 What's the contradiction. If an unfaithful spouse repents, then the fruit of that repentance is the acceptance that they must now either reconcile their marriage if possible, or live a single life, in accordance with the teachings of the Lord.
@@crazyb1ch "This would only have any bearing on someone who actually regretted cheated and wanted to remain part of the church." Um, yeah.... There's not a single commandment or teaching of Jesus that has any bearing on any unrepented soul with no desire to be in the Church. Of course people outside the the Church are to enslave themselves to their sinful desires! So, what exactly is your point?
Well done as always.
Brian you gotta tell me where you get your shirts!
And this is one major reason why MGTOW is growing. If you aren't allowed to replace toxic spouses with good spouses, better to go through life spouseless. You can't lose the game if you don't play it.
Check out Life Giving Wounds, which is a Catholic ministry for adult children of divorce.
Love those guys! I also appreciate Restored Ministry for young adults
The Roman Catholic Church is not the only church that has a traditional stance on divorce. The Eastern Orthodox Church only allows divorce for 3 things: Adultery, abuse and abandonment. The Oriental Orthodox Church takes it a step further only allowing divorce for adultery. Abandonment is the easiest to prove, and the rules for abuse are kind of strict. For instance, if the spouse is only abusive when under the influence of alcohol, then the priest may forbid that spouse from consuming alcohol in order to try and save the marriage. According to Pew Research, roughly 34% of Roman Catholics in the U.S. get divorced. For Orthodox Christians that number is about 9%. Frankly I feel that both numbers are very high, even though they are well below Protestant Christians at 51%. All in all, it does appear that the further away a couple gets from traditional roles, the more likely that they will get divorced. I think this also speaks to couples not fully discussing what they expect of each other, and what they expect and want for their lives. Interestingly, couples that actually attend church together frequently are less likely to get divorced vs. people that claim to be a religion and rarely ever go. As to the way that I read Mattew 5:31 - 5:32, it seems that Jesus was basically saying that if you divorce and remarry, you are committing adultery. If you were the one that had a spouse cheat on you, you might be able to get a divorce by this interoperation, but if you remarry are you now committing adultery against your previous spouse, and are you possibly causing your new spouse to become an adulterer being if they themselves were married before?
This is much more sensible and allows a way out in the very real and sadly common cases of abuse.
🙌🏻One hundred thousand percent about the AUTHORITY💓
The Traditional Catholic Church doesn’t allow divorce & remarriage. But the Novus Ordo does, they just call it an annulment.
Whoever told you that was ignorant. Annulments are very old and established in the church. It's a declaration that a previous relationship was not a valid marriage. They were usually necessary when women were abducted and forced to marry (thus why it's still mention in canon law). The more prominent cases are the ones we have specific historical evidence for deal with nobility go as far back as the 9th century A.D.
Though the abuse of the nullification process in the last 20 or so years is troubling, this is not some made up 20th century phantasy.
Hey! Annulment has existed in the church for a long time, and a famous example of that is King Henry the 8th in the protestant reformation who wanted an annulment that the Pope wouldn't grant to him. Annulment has roots long before that instance as well. Divorce is the dissolving of a marriage, which is obviously impossible. Annulment goes back to the original sacrament and investigates whether the sacrament was actually done properly. Most importantly, Annulment studies whether the two participants were free to give themselves to one another, because if one or both of them were coerced into the marriage then the sacrament itself isn't valid.
While annulments have a long history, they are now abused very often and granted to near all petitioners.
@@dyzmadamachus9842
I agree annulments existed for a long time, but they were extremely rare. Before Vatican 2 in the U.S. there were less than 100 a year, some years less than 10 ! Now there are 10,000 plus !!
I have personally known people who were married with children, then got divorced, & received annulments and remarried with the Novus Ordo “blessing “
We have to face reality. The modernists use annulments as an end run around divorce & remarriage. In PRACTICE the modern church does in fact allow not only divorce & remarriage, but many other degenerate moral outrages, such as contraception, co- habitation, homosexual “unions”, … pretty much whatever the latest nonsense the left wing is pushing , the modernists will find a loophole, or just simply ignore Traditional moral teachings, and say they are being “pastoral “
There’s only one Catholic Church. If you add any description to Catholic and stop following your local Bishop who is in union with the Pope you are now Protestant. Lutherans, Anglicans, Presbyterians, Old Catholics, etc were all started by Catholic priests who claimed Rome was not pure enough or required reform.
In the Lutheran LCMS Church we're even more strict than RCC. Divorce isn't even allowed for cheating. Barring physical abuse is it permitted. I'm not sure if even it's truly a Church-based divorce or if it's considered in the legal sense.
Divorces aren't allowed at all in the Catholic Church.
Bizarre. Luther’s Spouse neither cheated on him nor abused him, and yet he still divorced Her. He was an Augustinian monk who took vows of chastity and obedience to the Church.
@@jonathansmith4712 Luther isn't a pope or equivalent in Lutheranism. It's important to note, it is the Bible that leads us, not Luther. Luther, like all of us, is not beyond reproach.
@@swesleyc7 That’s not what I’m saying at all. As a monk, Luther was already married to the Church and then ran off and “married” a nun who was already married to Christ.
The family is important, but I am quite sensitive when the church barely speaks about domestic violence. For example, in Colombia domestic violence is everywhere. And they have the family as a high value there. Colombia is very conservative. But the priests there barely speak (if ever) about domestic violence, and as a result is kind of acceptable in the culture. I don't think it is consistent with the Gospel ignoring this issue.
Hello from Calgary!
Not all non-sacramental marriages are unlawful. My own marriage falls into that category. My wife is not baptized, so I had to obtain a dispensation from the bishop to marry her. I got the dispensation, and the priest officiated. Because my my wife is not baptized, our marriage is NOT a sacrament. It is considered a "natural" marriage, and I am permitted to receive the sacraments of the church. Curiously, because she is not baptized, I could--theoretically--petition the holy see to obtain "the privilege of the faith" (a.k.a. the Petrine Privilege) to dissolve my marriage. Crazy, huh?
I dont think you can obtain ''the privilege of the faith'' since You entered to your marriage with a dispensation from your bishop, so it is a valid marriage and you knew your wife was not baptized before married her. The ''privilege of the faith'' can be use only if you are not catholic, marry and then you convert to the faith but your spouse (who is not catholic) dont do it.
There needs to be some way out of a abusive or cruel marriage but also the commitment needs to be for life through thick or thin. Tricky where to draw the line in some cases as everyone behaves badly sometimes but where does the occasional bad behaviour tip over into an abusive situation. Adultery seems more clear cut but even after divorce (even if not religious) are they really separate? I know couples still living together or still caring for ill spouses even after no longer being together. Clear rules about what is/isn't acceptable behaviour would help but those have gone completely out the window in secular society.
There is: it's called seperation. The goal is to protect the spouses and work towards reunification.
I get your argument and if it wasn't for the way certain jurisdictions seem to dole out annulments I would believe you.
Life is messy, people should be expected to take their marriages seriously, but when a repentant convert has already made a mess of their life, they are already deep into a second marriage, have small children by this new marriage, and maybe their spouse is not Catholic so not under the authority of the church's demands to live a celibate life what is supposed to happen.
This type of situation is the reason the Catholic church allows for annulment, but it is a bureaucratic fiction that any inconvenient earlier marriages can just be waved away as not sacramental. It's especially unfair to children of annulled marriages who are unilaterally declared illegitimate by the church. Whatever the church claims otherwise.
The godly ideal is faithful marriage between one man and one woman for life, with the fruit of the Spirit expressed within the marriage between both partners. The failure of marriages to meet that ideal is, of course, because of human brokenness.
However, should a marriage fail, then according to NT counsel, a believer should not remarry unless the other partner has already done so. He/she should remain single and focus on works of helpfulness toward others, to the glory of the Lord.
When any of us fail to live up to the godly standards in any way, with contrite heart let us ask the Lord's forgiveness, for he is faithful so as to forgive. (1 John 1: 9)
The gospel doesn't allow remarriage. If you do it you're an adulterer and a polygamist.
"The only church left standing" Sir, let me introduce you to Eastern Orthodoxy. You know, the church the Roman Catholics separated from when they wanted to change doctrine in the year 1154 also known as the Great Schism. Still standing twice as long.
Divorce is allowed in Eastern Orthodoxy.
Hello! I pray 3 rosaries a day! Is that enough or is it maybe too much? It takes me around 15 minutes or up to 20 minutes to pray 1 holy rosary. So, 1 hour of prayer a day or even less. Do you think this is a good foundation alongside going to Sunday Mass? I also want to go to the confession but I am afraid to do so because of my po*n addiction and I feel shame.
Confession will help you get over your p*orn addiction. It helped me. P*rn free for years now. I'm only ashamed I didn't confess earlier
Go to Confession. No prayer can make up for that. It is the sacrament that brings you again to the state of grace. And do not think of your prayer in this way. More prayer doesn’t necessarily bring you closer to God, it’s not about the number of prayers or the time you spend praying.
You are doing well, my friend...
But Don't be shame all of us are sinners, and we need a doctor our Loord Jesus christ, confession is a kind of soul cleaner, that because of our Lord's mercy help us in the fight against of those kinds of addictions, and don't be afraid of falling again that is normal, because our Lord Jesus not just will declare you rightgeous, he will make you rightgeous... He will transform you and that process is painful, don't be afraid just be faithful... Go to confession that is going to heal You...
Watch Matt Fradd videos on the topic.
I went to confession multiple times a week for years for that same sin. I’ve now been clean for 8 months, due in large part to Confession. Don’t give up, Christ has grace waiting for you in the sacrament of confession.
I dont believe Jesus is saying that adultry nullifys a marriage. He is saying that adultery is the only justification for divorce. If you divorce, you are divorced, whether or not you should have. If you remarry, you remarry, whether or not you should have.
Excellent
Confessional Lutherans believe in binding and loosing sins. We have confession and absolution and haven't changed on divorce. The only reason we have a different number of sacraments is because we define them as the means of the forgiveness of sins.
Lutherans have no Sacraments except maybe Baptism
I grew up Lutheran and nobody ever talked about confession. One day I asked a pastor if we had something similar to the Catholic sacrament of reconciliation and he said they did. To this day I talk to Lutherans in their old age who never heard of such a thing and I realize that it's never been important to them even in light of Lutheran theology. Same with divorce and remarriage: they couldn't care less and, say, an LCMS pastor will just remarry anyone and never inquire into the previous marriage. This is just my experience and I mean no disrespect. I still go to Lutheran services with family but I've long since moved on. God bless you, brother.
lutheran never consider marriage as sacrament. that the main issue.
Luther said God doesn't care. He gave permission for Philip of Hess to take a 2nd wife. He said he could commit adultry 1000 x day and it wouldn't matter.
@@jayguevara6153I agree with you. I think it's unacceptable. The congregations aren't going to naturally do what is right. Not to be crass but I think one of the biggest reasons why the LCMS is often indistinguishable from evangelicals in areas is that pastors need to grow a pair and fear God not men. A pastor is a shepherd of your soul not your buddy.
Where in the world do you get those lovely shirts, Brian?
What about the Orthodox Church?
My personal opinion on marriage is this, divorce should be allowed in cases where the martial vows or the spirit of marriage is being violated. For example, I consider a husband abusing the wife and kids to be a violation of marriage as the husband is supposed to protect and care for them, not hurt them. Thus divorce should be allowed in such cases.
This might not be the Christian view on marriage, but I can't in good conscience, as someone who came from an abusive household, be against people divorcing because the marriage is abusive.
No fault divorce should absolutely be abolished though.
The Catholic Church permits separation and civil divorce in such cases. However, the couple is still married in the eyes of God and cannot pursue another spouse.
Jesus taught to take marriage seriously and not something to take lightly. You make a covenant to God when you say your vows "till death do us apart" people lack control, respect, honor nowadays. Jesus said let your yes be yes and your no be no
@@humbirdms2784So if you got physically, emotionally and maybe even sexually abused, leaving the abuser is a "lack of controll, honor and respect"?
Remarriage after divorce is the biggest part of the problem.
@@humbirdms2784 Easy solution. Take that part out of the vows or add qualifiers.
The Law of Non-Contradiction stands
Wait, a marriage can be valid but not sacramental. My wife is not baptized (yet! She is on the way HOME!) but we are married in the eyes of the Church but the marriage is not sacramental. This is what I have been told by my very traditional priests.
Divorce is forbidden, if a couple separates their only options are get back together or be celibate for the rest of their lives, remarried divorced people should not be allowed communion and the remedy for their condition is to end their adulterous relationship with their current "spouse" if two men got "married" we would insist they separate in repentance, why would we have a lessor standard for a couple living in adultery?
Well I guess it was "permitted", but never actively willed by God
Can non Catholic/Orthodox marriages be considered sacramental?
From what I understand, marriages between two baptized Christians of any stripe contract a sacramental marriage. Otherwise I think its simply a natural marriage which doesn't convey the grace of the sacrament.
Excellent points, the one about the Catholic church being the only one that claims that authority was kind of re-affirming of some of my doubts.
I agree with you regarding the logical impossibility of Christ offering adultery as an exception to the no-divorce rule. However, I'm having trouble with your alternative interpretation of Matthew 19. If Christ was speaking specifically about illicit marriages (those created only by man, not by God), would it even be necessary to bring up "unlawful sexual conduct"? It seems it would be sufficient to say that any unlawful marriage can be dissolved. I find the plain meaning words to be the most favorable most of the time, and this alternative interpretation where Christ uses a general term to speak to a very specific scenario seems a bit of a leap to me.
We can talk forever about the laws of man, and biblical commands etc etc. But in the end if a marriage fails with no hope of reconciliation, then what is a couple to do? Stay together, for Gods sake, for society sake. Surly, support, understanding and God given love and compassion is the way to go. What is the point of staying together.
In ancient Ireland before the christian era, according to the then Brehon Law, a young couple could stay together for one year as a trial - if it worked they stayed together, if not separate.
One person changing the way they react or defend themselves from the other has been known to help in the dynamic of the couple in a marriage. It helps in the beginning of restoration and and remember why you married each other. Many examples of this out there. That is part of the point of there being no exceptions for divorce. If people are not looking for a way out or a "loophole" because they think it's somewhere in the bible, they may be forced to fix their relationship if they don't want to live in a bit of a hell. Having hard conversations, boundaries, and commitment and a strategy helps, I am speaking from experience.
You can't invoke God to justify illicit, sinful behavior. This nullification of the gospel to justify degeneracy has resulted in the collapse of western society.
Going through one now. So awful
I would argue, as many more intelligent than I, that sexual immorality, or porneia in the Greek, can NOT be a reference to adultery on the basis that if adultery were discovered in a first century Jewish marriage, or any Jewish marriage all the way back to Moses, the marriage would end immediately, not through a bill of divorce, but rather by the death of the offending party by stoning.
How can Jesus be saying that an act which carries with it the death penalty is an acceptable justification for divorce?
I would argue rather, as many have, that this reference to sexual immorality is one of invalid marriages that should never have been joined in the eyes of God at their onset. Such unions would include those between prohibited relatives, as we know St. John the Baptist argued against Herrod taking as his wife, his own sister-in-law. Also included would be Brothers and sisters, uncles and nieces, as many of the surrounding pagan cultures, deemed acceptable, but which went against God’s law for Israel.
Haven't finished the video..but I'm confused on the contradiction?
You can only get divorced if there was adultery
So if there isn't adultery and you "get divorced" and remarry = adultery
If you wife cheats on you and you get divorced and remarry= not adultery.
Where is the contradiction here?
It isn't as simple as that. This is beyond the scope of a simple message but I suggest that you watch Sam Shamoun's live session that he did yesterday. One of the questions that a caller asked was regarding divorce and really, it is REALLY complicated. The best answer is to stick with what your particular church allows you to do. The live session in question is 'JEROME, RELIC VENERATION & OPEN Q&A' and the question is asked at about 1:50:00 mark and the explanation is lengthy.
But what dissolves the marriage, adultery itself or the decision of the offended party to dissolve it?
If it is the decision of the person, can that person make the decision without the approval and consent of the church? If the approval of the church is needed, is the church obligated to give it or can the church deny it if she has already decided?
If what dissolves the marriage is adultery itself, then do the spouses have to divorce no matter what if the adultery occurred, regardless of whether there is forgiveness?
Remember that we are talking about divorce and not separation. Divorce is understood to mean that the marriage is terminated and the person is free to marry again, while with separation alone, the person is not free to marry again.
@rdrdmaster5378 yeah I would say the church has to approve it and the adulterer has no say
The holy Catholic Church is unstoppable ❤️🔥
You are saying that if one remarries they are eternally condemned by perpetual adultery and cannot be forgiven, or cleansed by the blood of Jesus. This is not biblical you can be forgiven however it is a complex issue and as a Protestant I can agree that the Catholic teaching reinforces the gravity of these decisions.
Jesus making an exception is not a contradiction. Some might even say that an exception going against what was previously stated is the defining attribute of an exception lol.
I have no idea what you're claiming here Brian. If a priest presided at a marriage sacrament to a couple, the Church can't go back later and say "it wasn't valid in the first place".
Brian, great talk but can you edit out the background music?
Dominus tecum, Reg
you know what, I think this video is not your best work. There is historical president of pagan marriages being recognised as the pagans convert, and yet by your own arguments that makes an invalided marriage. there are plenty of other things people are giving off about, so I think perhaps this one is worth revisiting in the future
Excellent video!
Have you heard of “The Theology of the Body”? Listen to Christopher West. Is is from Pope John Paul II
I would not exactly call the widespread liberalism in your Vatican as standing firm. This general liberalism seems to have been implemented and trickled down widely (atleast in the new mass Novus Ordo realm). Francis has had sundry major controversies including FS same sex blessings, various issues with the Synod on Synodality, pluralism, syncretism, globalism, liberation theology etc. Even most recently he taught in Singapore that all religions are pathways to God. I even heard a Catholic admit online recently that conservative Protestantism is more orthodox than the state of affairs in Catholicism!
Look at this sweet accumulation of empty slogans and media headlines.
I would need you to clarify further.
If your second marriage is adulterous it is BECAUSE your first marriage exists. Therefore your adultery is in direct opposition and an offense to your existing marriage and spouse. Your second marriage is doing something TO that original marriage; the original marriage is what is impacted by the adultery. You are committing adultery AGAINST your original/existing spouse.
Adultery is justification for divorce, end of story.
The sketchy scenario is actually annulment. Finding “some fault” with your spouse, then putting them away (saying the marriage was never valid is a pretty convenient loophole).
In that case I would not say that the Catholic Church is the only one left standing, but perhaps the first to fall.
NOW in my opinion, the spouse that initiates an unjustified divorce and then commits adultery by remarrying (or having intercourse with another) is the offending party in the matter, thus making the victimized spouse “free”.
In the Bible, is there instruction to divorce second spouses and remarry first spouses? If not, then that might point to the new marriage bearing some type of legitimacy
I am very open to enlightenment on this topic. I’m only asking for you to clarify further.
It makes no sense that one spouse is free to marry and the other is not. I think that at least one has to admit that the offender is free to marry if the offended party exercises his “right” to marry again and he (the offender) has repented of having sinned.
And this is so because if the offended spouse does marry, then once he or she remarries then the first marriage ceases to exist for the offender as well.
The contradiction would be in saying “The offender is no longer married and yet cannot remarry.”
Ah there is the confusion I think.
It’s true that the offender cannot be beholden to an original marriage once it is voided (which is your take), but that’s completely different than saying the offender sinned, thus the marriage can be ended (which is my take).
I think these two concepts can be very easily conflated. It may be helpful to think of it this way: if you steal from me, why should I then go to jail? Requiring the victim spouse to stay in bondage to a husband she can’t marry -because he is married to another-seems like an illogical punishment (but if God wants it that way, then so be it, as we are under His authority).
I’m just saying a person cannot just spread that adultery in one sense can’t end a marriage when the Bible says that it does. (again if I can no longer marry my spouse, then that must not be my spouse, for how can I not marry someone I’m already married to?). And also it would be helpful to explain why it’s biblically okay that annulments get a pass).
So you agree that once the party offended by the infidelity enters into a new marriage, the offender (the adulterer) is free to marry? (My position is that adultery does not dissolve the marriage bond nor is it a reason for its dissolution and therefore neither of the two is free to marry again although the offended spouse is free to seek separation.)
Annulments should only be granted if it is discovered that the marriage had a defect of form and/or substance. A defect of form would be, for example, if they got married on the beach without the bishop's dispensation to do so. A defect of substance would be, for example, if the husband was forced to marry by the wife's father because he had gotten her pregnant or if the wife was a drug addict and somehow managed to hide that information from the husband until after the marriage had been consummated so the husband did not have relevant information to give his consent to the marriage.
It can also be done if it is proven that in some way one (or both) of the spouses did not have the mental capacity, the mental state or in general the psychological freedom to consent to the marriage, but in this case the word of the spouses should not be enough, but there should be written proof or at least three valid witnesses who can attest that this was the case.
Another example, if someone marries someone with the intention of divorcing a couple of years later to take away half of the other person's assets, it is clear that it was not a valid marriage and can be annulled.
Annulments do not contradict the Bible because the marriage never really existed, in fact, whoever receives an annulment does not receive an "annulment", they receive a "declaration of nullity" which declares that what seemed like a marriage was not really one.
@@rdrdmaster5378 I think the offending party is always going to be the party “at fault”. Yes we are all “free to sin” because we have free will. In that case it is possible that a distinction needs to be made between being “free” to do something and being “justified” in doing something.
As for annulments, they are just not biblical, ALTHOUGH the points you made regarding annulments seem really legit, in my opinion, and you did a good job explaining those scenarios.
A contract that can be broken at will by either party is not a true contract. It's Nothing.
It should be a binding 3 way contract between only 3 parties, man, woman and God.
The family court doesn't respect the sacredness of the contract $$
Look for a Life Giving Wounds retreat. You will find tremendous healing!
Would love to hear and know more about the Church's indisputable authority over even heaven, and how this intertwines with God's authority
If you read all the verses about marriage Jesus NEVER says it’s okay to remarry. That “permission” is being read into the scriptures.
I'm sorry, but you're not hitting the Catholic teaching about marriage nail on the head.
Brian
Could you make a video on pascendi against modernism from st Pius X?
What about a married couple outside the Church, or even outside Christianity? Like a Hindu or Muslim couple? Are these not considered lawful marriage under divinely inspired human laws (so long as it’s one man and one woman)? Or is this considered fornication, since it’s “marriage” that is “outside” the Church?
They're valid but not sacramental. Only Catholics are required to marry in the church.
They would be valid natural marriages which doesn't convey the grace of the sacrament but is considered a real marriage recognized by the church.
3 Hail Marys for your intentions, particularly for your marriage 🌹🌹🌹🙏🏻✝️
I finally get it! Thank you.
Idk man my congregation is rock solid.
❤
The verse isn’t about adultery. It’s about illegality.
The Catholics are against divorce? In the bible Jesus allows divorce only for unfaithfulness, which is good, thank God. It is not good to remain in a marriage if there’s no love, this leads to abuse, violence and even murder in many cases. If there’s no God, love of God, fear of God, love for His word and obedience to His word, no fear of God and His judgments, from both husband and wife, if not the children grow up confused unloved no guidance and good example, they grow up to be abusive and ungodly.
WHEN JESUS CHRIST IS HERE. all will see who is who in THE CHURCH and THE CHURCH IT'S SELF . This will tell as Judgement Day will......COME LORDJESUS❤AMEN!
BUT IT IS NOT "STANDING FIRM." Every Christian SECT and every SECT within a SECT, has it's unique derived EXCUSES for "divorce." EVERY ... SINGLE .... ONE.
7:50 Recap.
Cool. And what about same sex marriages? Gay Catholics, once married, aren't allowed to divorce, are they?
They could not, I guess, but same sex marriages do not exist.
If I had it to do over again, if I knew then what I know now, I would have gotten a divorce. The Bible makes provision for divorce because God is not cruel. Even He divorced Israel (Jeremiah 3:8). Ecclesiastes 7:16 warns us, "Do not be overly righteous, nor be overly wise: why should you destroy yourself?"
You really shouldn't be using the Bible because you don't understand it.
Christ abrogated the old testament law. If you need to separate, then separate but you are not allowed to divorce and remarry without the church first giving you an annulment.
@@loriw.9653 Prove it! Show me the Scripture where Jesus told us to not keep the Law or ignore the Old Testament. What I've read is where He said in the Sermon on the Mount, "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the Law till all is fulfilled." Matthew 5:17-18
The funny part is that even in the Old Testament time people were claiming that God's Law was abolished: "It is time for You to act, O Lord, For they have regarded Your Law as void." Psalm 119:126
You can always count on Satan to dig into the same old bag of tricks
Great video! Please do some commentary on the annulment crisis in the Catholic Church. I am a convert from the Orthodox Church. My own divorce in the Orthodox Church is why I am Catholic today. My ex wife was ‘remarried’ in the same Orthodox parish 10 months after the divorce was official. It’s been several years and I still haven’t applied for an annulment. I heard there are approx 50,000 annulments in the Catholic Church each year in the US alone. There were only like 50 globally in around 1900. I feel like I cannot trust the tribunals decision, especially if they grant the annulment. Some diocese have a 90%+ approval rate. I would love to hear your thoughts.
My X Was an abusive narcissist.
Said everyone.
Me too! What’s your name, girl? What’s your sign? 😀
many thanks. Without Jesus's "but I say to you" being present today the Incarnation is nullified. Virtual silence on this from the pulpit is failure to preach the Gospel.
Just because a couple goes up to the Altar and a Priest marries them doesn't mean God has joined them!
If its a marriage of convenience or one of them's heart isn't there at all then God knows and it's just called a "Farse"!
For God to join them in this situation is simple wrong! God is not to be mocked! God joins ONLY those who's hearts are there in Love!
God bless all and I'm open to correction!
Since this is about 💍Marriage/Divorce, I need to send a warning because judgement day is filled with people people that took God's Law lightly and expect another warning (reference Luke 16:28) ...
WARNING: Do NOT go to a marriage *ceremony that involves formerly divorced "Christians" getting married, without first assuring the legal context of their previous divorce is worth you being COMPLICIT in their "Christian" marriage‼
If it's a pagan that is different however.... if it is a "Christian" (as in they bear the title - let alone if it be actually Catholic), there is HIGHER judgement - do NOT corrupt the title of "Christian" . If Catholics give over the word and Protestants give over the word - the meaning of the word "Christian" is given over to Satan's 😈power (may God judge you for that😡)