The Radical Nature of Jesus’ Teaching on Marriage

Jesus' teaching on marriage (and particularly on divorce and remarriage) is so radical that his stunned disciples respond, “If such is the case of a man with his wife, it is not expedient to marry” (Matt. 19:10). So what is Jesus' radical teaching, and why don't more Christians know about (or follow) that teaching? And is it true that Jesus creates an "exception" for divorce and remarriage in cases of adultery? (Answer: no.)

[@From_Protestant_to_Christian]

I know many people that converted from Calvinism to Christianity because of the good work of Catholic Answers. ✝️✝️✝️

[@KEP1983]

Bingo. I like how you contrasted Calvinism vs Christianity. We should be referring to Protestants as "Protestants" and Catholics as "Christians," not the other way around.

[@EmberBright2077]

​​@@KEP1983 I think we should be the bigger person and not stoop to their level.

[@BiteTheHook]

@@EmberBright2077exactly. Be the bigger person and tell the truth: that we should call Catholics “Christians” and Protestants “Protestants”

[@363catman]

You should be historically accurate and refer to catholics as Jewish apostates and protestants Jewish apostate heretics.

[@a_Catholic_Ant]

@@EmberBright2077 Based. Edit: Seriously if we want to stop being called non-Christians we must return the favor Niece Creed definitions are more useful anyway.

[@tonyl3762]

Engaged couples in pre-marriage prep at parishes should have to watch this.

[@henrytucker7189]

Absolutely.

[@fabianapimentel6114]

My father divorced my christian mom and she did exactly that you said, she considered herself married to him even wheb he moved on and "remarried" had kids and so on. My mom is one of the most cared woman by God that I know, so many times she was conforted by Him emotionally, spirituality and financially, I can't keep counting it. God can make a horrible situation good if we keep believing him (doing the hard things He asks us). Our Lord is so good always!

[@henrytucker7189]

Wow. No one has loved your father more than your mom (besides Christ). She's a saint.

[@96Blackstone]

My Wife left me and our kids. She filed and got a piece of paper with illicit ink on it. I still wear my wedding ring and have told my kids we are still married because it was and is a sacramental marriage. I pray for her every day. Will you pray for her and my kids too?

[@LuisEstebanGomezAlduncin]

She’s a saint, glory to God

[@julieoelker1865]

At the Ruth Institute, run by Dr. Jennifer Roback-Morse, her followers call themselves standers. They stand for their marriage even if the spouse does not.

[@TheApostolicLens]

I'm currently in the process of joining RCIA at my local parish. My wife is a protestant and previously divorced. So... I need her to understand that she needs her marriage annulled not only for the "eyes of men" as she would say but in the eyes of God to do right and to bring grace in our marriage now. This video I'm going to show her and I pray she doesn't be to overly critical but I do believe you have made it so simple on why the church does not condone divorce or remarriage Thanks Joe!

[@enderwiggen3638]

You can check with the priest, not all protestant marriages are recognized as a valid sacrament depending on what denomination it was in (not all have an actual priesthood that can validly perform marriage).

[@susand3668]

Dear@@enderwiggen3638, you are right, by all means, check with a priest. My husband had been married by a justice of the peace, and still needed the formal Tribunal acknowledgement that the marriage was null in the eyes of God before we could be married. It was a simple process. We will hope for the best for @CatholicYankee and his wife!!

[@PatrickSteil]

May God Bless your journey. Mine wasn’t quite as tough but similar and stressful nonetheless. My wife came into unity with the Church this Easter Vigil. Prayers for lots of patience and humility...

[@John_Fisher]

@@enderwiggen3638 Just as a point of clarification, even if the marriage is not sacramental, it can still be a natural marriage. Humans can enter into valid natural marriages outside of and prior to Christianity if they meet the fundamental requirements of what marriage is, so they still will need to go through the annulment process. In fact, even if it is case where clearly cannot be a valid marriage, they generally still need to go through the process of having the church recognize it as such, it just may be a much simpler and more expedited process.

[@kerry8506]

That’s tough, man. I’ll say a prayer for both of you.

[@bartekdyszkiewicz1359]

I've been longing to here a clear teaching on this for the last 20 years as a "protestant" with both my parents divorced and remarried. The internal struggle regarding my parents divorces and my relationship to them has resurfaced this last week being more intense than ever almost consuming my soul all day and now it appears I know why; God knew I would be hearing this today. Thank you for your work once again!!! I now have a road map to navigate this territory and light to see where I am and where I need to go!

[@susand3668]

Happy Third Week of Easter! May the Resurrection of our Lord and Savior bring you Hope and Peace! I am praying for you and both your parents. For a way forward for you and your family. God bless you!

[@benabaxter]

My favorite gag in Intolerable Cruelty is the name of the divorce lawyer organization: National Organization of Matrimonial Attorneys, Nationwide, or NOMAN. Its motto, of course, is: "What God has joined together, let NOMAN put asunder." It's the same gag as Chesterton's joke about building ever larger needles and breeding ever-smaller camels---as if we can loophole our way out the the demands of the Gospel.

[@jameskeith352]

Catholic convert here. This is a topic I have been meaning to look into because a lot of my former Baptist brethren/friends are okay with divorce and remarriage whereas the Church is not. This was super helpful. Thank you Joe!

[@scopilio13]

i find it so ironic that these protestant denominations are all about scripture and "if it isn't in the bible it isn't true," but then you get very explicit passages like this in scripture and the only people who listen are the catholics.

[@joekey8464]

@@scopilio13 this is a hard teaching, that not everyone can comply..

[@henrytucker7189]

@@joekey8464 Yup. That's why the Apostles told Jesus it would be better to not marry! If Jesus was just taking a conservative approach based on the law of Moses, they would not have said such a thing, because divorce exceptions for infidelity were ALREADY a part of the conservative Jewish community.

[@joekey8464]

@@henrytucker7189 Yes, the vows of Matrimony is of the same magnitude as the vows of a priest in Holy Orders. A priest for life.

[@joshuadavis9229]

I am a Baptist Pastor, and I teach Jesus' words here. We teach that there are only two permissible reasons for divorce (Matthew 19, 1 Corinthians 7), and there is no remarriage until the death of your spouse.

[@SilverioFamilyforChrist]

In our transition from Protestantism to Catholicism, my wife and I were discussing this topic at length for quite some time. We had the presuppositions from Protestantism color our view of the subject. This was quite the illuminating video.

[@pendletondrew]

Let's goooo! Thanks, Joe! You never disappoint! My wife and I talked about this a lot. Nobody gets married to get divorced, but it is not an option for us and this is something that pushes us to love each other harder when things are rough, among other things of course. Lol. Growing up in a broken home sucked. I don't blame my Dad, he was left by unfaithful women, but recognizing that, in the truest way possible, my wife and I made our promises to each other before God and He will continually call us to go deeper as long as we call upon Him when things are tough has made it awesome even when things aren't. Lol. Being married to my wife has made me love God more and more and perhaps this is why some Christian marriages fail, when one or both people forget that the marriage covenant is not merely a promise to another person but to God as well.

[@fantasia55]

Millions of women get married to get divorced. Men have caught on, so weddings are now rare.

[@pendletondrew]

@@fantasia55 I didn't mean literally nobody like not a single person. I'm speaking in the context of a Christian marriage where both parties get married with the intention of staying married for life but still end up divorcing. Plenty of divorced couples did not have divorce in mind when they went to the altar.

[@catholicguy1073]

💯 I truly think if it wasn’t for us promising to God to stay married we may not be married today. We’ve gone through 4 years of hell since COVID. Things are better but we ain’t back yet so yes you know if your spouse is your soul mate when stuff gets hard. When life kicks you in the teeth.

[@fantasia55]

@pendletondrew Plenty of them brag about it, on Tik Toc and elsewhere.

[@fantasia55]

@@pendletondrew Whatever her intention at first, every wife has the legal option to divorce her husband and take his property.

[@jimmydavid1993]

The Clearest explanation of the biblical harmonious intolerance for divorce that I have ever heard. While I have never cared about it purely based on trust in the Church's position. I have a better appreciation of this teaching today. Joe is a gem. His explanation or arguments just hit the punches far more than...... God bless you, Joe! What Joe has taught let no one argue otherwise🤪

[@PatrickSteil]

Adding this video to our RCIA chapter on Marriage! So good!!!

[@ericholmberg2963]

Home run, Joe...the best, most clear, concise, systematic, ironclad apologetic I've ever heard or read on one of the most important issues in life. (And I have processed more than a few of them.) It also happens to be the one where the sandy foundations of Protestantism are most clearly manifested. I say this as a former pastor who went through a personal holocaust--much of it of my own making--eleven years ago when my wife of 32 years and five kids divorced me. As I went through the no-fault, civil divorce process in the "Family Court" system (now there's an oxymoron if there ever was one) and also processed it ecclesiastically through the hodgepodge of varying opinions and the utter impotence of the faux judicial "system" (when it comes to this subject, there really isn't one) that wafts up out of the Protest-anthill, I realized I was facing the obverse side of a brass sestertius I was very familiar with, one that had been forged in the fires of hell. (The reverse side is abortion--an issue I had been very involved in fighting for over thirty years. Abortion, aka child sacrifice, destroys the fruit of a one-flesh union. The obverse is divorce, which destroys--really murders--the root.) And then it hit me: There is one--and only one--Church that is still standing strong for "the radical nature of Jesus' teaching on marriage." (Well, at least as far as her dogmatic position on the issue. Sadly, like so many other truths that have been compromised and even lost in the practice of the Catholic faith in so many peoples' hearts and minds (laity and clerics alike), divorce and remarriage have been normalized to a tragic degree. (Some dioceses grant annulments at rates of 90% and higher. Really?)) It was soon after all the ravaging winds had calmed down that I kicked up my quest for the church Jesus truly founded a couple of notches. And after more pain, repentance, and crying out to the un--doer of knots to dispose of the Gordian-sized one I was dragging around behind me, I entered the Catholic church (swam the Bosphorus Strait, rather than the Tiber if anyone cares) four Easters ago. And this issue is one I will always be passionate about. The diabolical realm's prime directive is to attack and destroy the Domestic Church, the family. (If that domino falls, every other one eventually falls as well.) And while many new fronts have opened up in this ultimate battle (artificial contraception, porn, the demasculization of boys and men, public schools, the normalization of sex and gender confusion, inflation (making it financially difficult for the wife to stay home and out of the workforce), mRNA vaccines, the denaturing of our foods, I can go on), the two main gates into Isengard are divorce and infanticide.

[@gk3292]

@ericholm….spot on!! preach it brother!!

[@retrocalypse]

Good grief this finally makes sense to me! THANK YOU! I had my 'marriage' annuled a few years back. I'm much wiser now at 50. Ten years alone now and knowing what marriage really is I can definitely say I won't be doing it. lol Love you, Joe!

[@hirehammer925]

How can you have a strong stance on marriage and allow annulments?

[@Chicken_of_Bristol]

Love how methodical these videos are. I don't know any other apologetics channel that always fully anticipates and addresses every one of my possible thoughts and objections on the topic.

[@bearistotle2820]

Joe, you are the first person to explain what the "porneia" clause actually refers to. I had always thought the church's approach was confusing and wondered where it originated. Thank you for explaining this so well!

[@andrewpearson1903]

This is the best taking-apart I’ve ever seen of not only the Protestant, but the Eastern Orthodox divorce exceptions - the “innocent spouse can remarry” clause is an important plot point in Anna Karenina (set in Orthodox Russia). Christian Wagner said this a couple days ago, it sure feels good to turn the magnifying glass on our critics, who can never stand up to the cross-examination they insist on giving us. Keep it up Joe, & God bless.

[@alonsoACR]

Historically, the Orthodox were the strictest on this. They often discouraged (though of course, never forbid) remarriage even after the death of a spouse. One per lifetime kinda thing. It's really sad how for all their talk of keeping orthodoxy, their regional Patriarchs are absolutely going rogue on many things. Divorce is one, contraception is another, church authority yet another (once upon a time one dare not defy the bishops and the Ecumenical Patriarch). In a dialogue with an Eastern Orthodox Christian, I found out their excommunications are regional. Regional! That's some Presbyterian kind of whack!

[@lellachu1682]

Yes, this was one of the reasons I didn't revert to the Eastern Orthodox faith of my grandparents.

[@josh39684]

It's the best day of the week... Shameless Poppery just dropped another episode. The Protestant church I attend allows divorce and remarriage so this was very helpful. Thanks Joe!

[@PatrickSteil]

It’s amazing that at one point all Christian Churches did not allow contraception, divorce or abortion. Now it’s a free for all. All part of the same problem. A hyper focus on Gods grace without learning about his Justice (and Mercy). And also the fact that they have nothing in place to keep their “tradition” from veering away from the True teachings of Jesus and His Church. May God have mercy on us all.

[@josh39684]

​@PatrickSteil Honestly I'm beginning to see a connection between the Protestant Rebellion and the way the world is going. That said the church could have and should have tried harder to stop the rebellion better back in the 16th century

[@PatrickSteil]

@@josh39684 💯 absolutely agree on both points. This is the same old story that we see in Scripture. 1. God, we are lost, we need you, we need a King. We need your law. 2. Hey things are looking up! Gods law is amazing! 3. Things are just wonderful. We have really done wonders through our own effort. We don’t need God anymore. 4. God, we are lost, we need you, we need a King. We need your law. And all of this because we forget from one generation to the next what the Truth of God is. This is what the whole purpose of the Catholic Magisterium is. The entire Church holding each other accountable to Gods Truth. I was Methodist and figured this out when 50% of the denomination was claiming Scripture says it’s ok to bless homosexual marriages and pastors. They were not interested in Gods Truth at all.

[@Vaughndaleoulaw]

@@PatrickSteilI don't think it is a hyper focus on God's grace, rather it is a devaluing of it. God's grace is intended to drive you to repentance.

[@josh39684]

@PatrickSteil it's a definitely a revolving cycle. I grew up a reformed Baptist. Honestly never felt right to me because it felt like my truth vs your truth. That never felt right to me even at age 10. Wasn't till recently I decided to act on it till a year ago. Not Catholic yet because I currently live with my anti-Catholic parents

[@ToddJambon]

Another great video from The Hesch, which I just decided is your new nickname.

[@samuelnicacio4621]

My wife and I use: "Joe Freaking Heschmeyer" 😂

[@MikePasqqsaPekiM]

Amen. Thank you for these patient, clear thoughts. Christian teaching on marriage is challenging, but that is why we need to daily pray for our spouse, our marriage, and most especially for grace. We have all sorts of beautiful passages encouraging us to endure hardships, run the race marked out for us, knowing all things are working together for our good…yet a marriage falls apart and suddenly we functionally become like Peter rebuking Christ for talking about His coming cross. Be a faithful spouse, and be a faithful friend. Don’t enable people struggling through a difficult marriage to run from their crosses, please.

[@bryandonovan6779]

Joe, I watched the entire video because I had hoped you would go deep into the covenantal nature of marriage in the Church. Hopefully you do in next weeks follow on video . I have come to realize that this covenantal nature of marriage between Catholics is incredibly profound given that the Eucharist is both the "Sacrifice" and "Meal" of the marriage covenant. Because it means that every time we receive the Eucharist throughout our lives we, in a way, we relive/represent our own wedding day, in the shadow of "Ziccaron", which is an Old Hebrew word I bet you are familiar with. I am hoping you discuss the "formula" of a Biblical covenant which includes the oath, sacrifice and meal as mentioned above. The discussion on porneia was interesting and the contrast you present with the Protestant misunderstanding is very clear. This misunderstanding is just as prevalent among Catholics unfortunately. That is why I watch your channel. Keep up the good work you are doing for the Kingdom. Viva Christo Rei !!!

[@ericgatera7149]

This is insightful. Never heard this approach before. You should write a New Testament commentary, for there are many verses which deserves elucidation.

[@DystopianProphet]

This is the most detailed and logical analysis of this topic I have ever seen.

[@dreamweaver3406]

I so appreciate the church’s clear teachings on divorce and remarriage! Thank you Joe for sharing this message- all Christians need to know and understand it

[@R.C.425]

I greatly enjoyed this video... Now you need a video for those who have been married and/or divorced outside the church. 😢 Thank you

[@clarekappenman5564]

Joe, you keep answering questions I've had for years! A couple of years ago (one of your first appearances on CA Live) you just casually mentioned that the 66-book Bible did not become standard in Protestantism until the 1820s and it was basically because a British missionary society with immense reach chose that version. That had been a question of mine for a long, long time ever since learning that Martin Luther didn't believe some NT books were inspired. And now you've so clearly explained about porneia, another question I've wondered about ever since learning that it didn't mean adultery and was a rarely-used term... what DID it mean then?! Your explanation pointing to Leviticus makes a ton of sense, especially why that word wouldn't show up much in non-Jewish Greek sources, since it just wasn't even a concept for the Greeks. Keep up the good work.

[@thepentacostalchatholicconvert]

Thank you Joe for your amazing clarifying teaching. This video will help so many people to understand what the Catholic Church teaches on this subject. Your reward in heaven will be huge! 🎉

[@nickswicegood4316]

It seems to me that an acceptance of divorce and remarriage among Protestants makes sense given their divorce from Christs Church. If marriage is the clearest human picture of Christ and the church then if you can leave the church and start a new one you can leave your marriage and start a new one.

[@PatrickSteil]

Yes! If they don’t understand the New Covenant, our Covenant with God they won’t see the parallel in our Marriage Covenant. All of this so we can have complete unity with our spouse, our family, our Church, Society and our Savior. The Catholic Faith is amazing!

[@catholicguy1073]

The Orthodox have this position as well from what I understand

[@gk3292]

…yup!!🎯

[@alonsoACR]

Making Christ into a serial divorcer is one of the most disgusting things I've heard in my life. Lord have mercy...

[@PatrickSteil]

@@alonsoACR Catholic Church still does not allow divorce... it is holding to the True teachings of our LORD.

[@sartoriusrock]

I look forward to listening on this. Many close friends and I come from broken families, even those who are Christian/Catholic; I pray that we may walk forward following Christ in the most faithful way possible.

[@nickw9766]

Some people like to do a selective reading of Matthew 19. Easy to cherry pick verses right out of the Bible. I’ve had it done to me before. Great video

[@Catholicconvertgroyper]

Great resource for explaining to my friends and family that are still protestant

[@eliasmartinez9485]

Great episode and very informative. The tension build was excellent because I was already at my wits end for you to hurry and tell me what porneia was meant to be to tie everything together.

[@decinate]

I've been struggling with this for a while when it comes to my family. Thanks so much for this Joe!

[@AnnulmentProof]

Are you Catholic?

[@wjtruax]

Thank you, Joe! This is an excellent take-down of Protestant arguments that allow divorce. I've been involved in a lot of conversations with "former Catholics" (we know such people don't really exist) who claim that the fact that a lot of people are leaving Catholicism for one of the various Protestant traditions is "proof" that Catholicism is wrong. Well, we could continue that argument and state that the number of "ex-vangelicals" is greatly on the rise and that, therefore, proves that Christianity, as a whole, is invalid. What does people leaving Catholicism for Protestantism and Protestants leaving Christianity entirely have to do with Jesus' (and thus Catholic Church's) teaching on marriage? Very simply, because I believe it's really all about sex. People leave Catholicism because the expression of sexuality is "extremely narrow" (in the view of our culture). The prohibition on contraception is hard. The fact that marital sexual union and expression - especially the husband's climax - must always be open to life, is hard. I'm sure some wrestle with having had a completely valid marriage only to be abandoned later because a spouse turned from Christ and an annulment has been denied. That's a hard thing In the Protestant world, a marriage is valid per se, as long as there is a certificate and it is a heterosexual couple (sadly the bar isn't even that high in some "churches"). The marriage might have been officiated by Elvis at 3:30am in Las Vegas, but I've never met a Protestant pastor who would say that the marriage is "invalid." The bar for a valid marriage is so low as to not exist. And the bar for a valid divorce might exist in principle in some congregations, but it's extremely easy to find a Protestant pastor who will welcome you into his/her congregation with your divorce and be fully willing to perform your next marriage ceremony. Even if there is a bar, very, very few pastors will say, "Sorry, you're not really divorced. You're still married to your first spouse. I will not perform the ceremony, and if you get married somewhere else, you may not be a member at this church." There are a few, but very, very few. And with so many options, just go down the street. Marital problems in the Protestant world? No matter what reason for your divorce, you can get remarried and it doesn't impact your eternal destiny. You might be culpable and have runaway with someone else, but since all your sins, "past, present, and future" were forgiven when you "got saved," you're eternal destiny is secure. The standard Protestant sexual ethic within marriage is characterized very simply: As long as both spouses agree, and no third (or fourth, etc.) party is involved, "anything goes." Not so in the Catholic sexual ethic. And mortal sin. Since there's no "mortal sin" in the Protestant world, if you've got a problem with lust and pornography, and even fornication, the Protestant world offers an out. Yes, it is sinful, but you can be easily forgiven because...doctrinally you've already been forgiven. There's no need to for the sacrament of reconciliation. I strongly suspect that many vehement "former Catholics" who rail against the Church using the oft-repeated Protestant rationale - "idolatry of Mary," "purgatory isn't biblical," "I don't need to confess my sins to a priest," "Bible alone," "faith alone," etc. - at their core, didn't want to live by Catholic teaching on marriage and morality in general and in Protestantism found a way to believe that they have enhanced their relationship with Christ while enjoying a much more broadly acceptable practice of marriage and personal sexuality. In the same way, I strongly suspect that a lot of people leave Protestante Christianity as a whole (the "ex-vangelicals") because they don't want to have any sexual ethic at all imposed on them from outside. They want to be their own ultimate moral authority (which I refer to as "egotheism" - "I am (my own) god"). They at least have the intellectual honesty to realize that Christianity in general does include a sexual ethic that is much more rigid than the world imposes, and that they don't want that. They will argue that their reasons for leaving Christianity are intellectually-based - and for some I'm sure that's true. However, for many I submit that the actual reasons began with Christ establishment of a sexual ethic that they simply don't want to abide by.

[@vinoneil]

Very excellently and exhaustively stated.

[@susand3668]

I am so very sorry that you had that experience. It is possible to request another Tribunal to re-open your case, if there is more information about the state of your spouse's intentions at the time she married you. (I am assuming from your icon that you are male. On the Internet, one can't always be sure.) Everything depends on the situation at the time of the exchange of marriage vows. For instance, there are some who never grow up -- they never were capable of making a vow and keeping it. There are some who intentionally hold back a complete giving of themselves -- they justify themselves by saying to themselves, "I will give this marriage a good college try, but if it doesn't work out, I'm out of here." All that aside, bless you, my fellow pilgrim, for the wisdom you share in your comment!!

[@wjtruax]

@@susand3668 I’m sorry…that was a hypothetical situation, not mine. I’ve been happily, and validly, married for 31 years. I’ll edit my comment to make it clear that I’m giving a hypothetical, but I’m sure real for some, situations.

[@susand3668]

Dear@@wjtruax, what a relief! I am so glad! And I am sure that God will use my prayers for you both for YOU, and for your (hypothetical) couple! God is GOOD!

[@henrytucker7189]

One of my Catholic neighbors has parents who became Protestant so they COULD get divorced. Sad.

[@jamiejaegel7962]

From Douay-Rheims, “When thou shalt hate her put her away, saith the Lord, the God of Israel: but iniquity shalt cover his garment, saith the Lord of hosts, keep your spirit, and despise not.”

[@susand3668]

Thank you for this verse from the Douay-Rheims version, which is translated from the Septuagint version of the Old Testament. The English language of 500 years ago is a little difficult. Here is that verse (Malachi 2:16) in a more modern translation: “If he hates and divorces his wife,” says the Lord God of Israel, “he covers his garment with injustice,” says the Lord of Armies. Therefore, watch yourselves carefully, and do not act treacherously." (Christian Standard Bible) Most modern translations of the Bible are based on the Hebrew version, rather than the Greek version known as the Septuagint (most early Christians knew the Septuagint version). In the Septuagint, the emphasis in Malachi is on the continuation of verse 16 from verse 15. In the Masoretic text (the Hebrew Bible codified during the first thousand years after Christ), the emphasis is placed on the Lord's rejection of divorce. A slight variation, to be sure. The second chapter in Malachi is addressed to the Levitical priests, who were not keeping the covenant the Lord had made with them. Malachi 2:10-17 focuses in on the violence and unfairness inherent in divorce. Just as Jesus does.

[@cruznature7545]

​@susand3668 ..I thought the Douay-Rheims Bible was translated from the Latin Vulgate.

[@alonsoACR]

​@@cruznature7545 Only the New Testament, as far as I'm aware. Douay-Rheims is beautiful (or at least I gather, as I'm not a native English speaker I but fail to detect the nuances a native speaker may get. I struggle to "get" English poetry at large), but not the most accurate, as it's a translation of a translation.

[@PuzzlesC4M]

I'm not even kidding you when I tell you a protestant recently told me that she supports divorce if the husband views p*rn because of the rationality you explained!

[@lukeohanlon2960]

What an important message that most Christians seen to ignore ❤

[@HumanDignity10]

This was the best explanation I’ve heard on this topic. Thank you Joe!

[@housecry]

Excellent. I hope you continue the long form videos with visual citations.

[@borquelepork1057]

What a great explanation of biblical marriage

[@HarleyGirl75]

This really helped understand annulments better. Thank you!

[@jambangoni]

You need to keep doing what you’re doing. This is great

[@cw-on-yt]

I was basically taught the Catholic view during my upbringing in a Southern Baptist church. But then the church had a "ministry to divorced persons," and basically couldn't figure out a practical way to _follow_ what they had been taught. (It turns out that, in order to _enforce_ the Biblical teaching, the Church has to have a worldwide legal structure and exercise judicial authority, with an appeals process and some final court-of-appeal. Other than the ancient hierarchical and sacerdotal churches, the only thing that even _pretends_ to exert a similar kind of authority is the Beth Din of Rabbinical Judaism.)

[@henrytucker7189]

Yup. A universal magisterium has its advantages. Can't just leave and go down the street to the next "church" when you don't get your way.

[@JimCvit]

Finally a good explanation on this. Thanks.

[@alan-muscat]

Wow. Great convincing presentation.

[@kaydeelethal]

Ooooh Joe!!! U have a TON of questions on this subject that deter me from this vocation just based on experiences from my friends and siblings and peers

[@carlosux]

this should be required viewing by every christian

[@CanadianAnglican]

I really enjoy your videos. They’re very informative. Thank you. 🙏🏿

[@triconcert]

Truly excellent. Thanks Joe for tremendous illumination.

[@kainosktisis777]

Before entering the Church, I had attended at a Nondenominationalist church where the pastor had one day said that divorce was ok, & it had a divorced & remarried pastor in staff. Just saying…

[@jambangoni]

This needs to be sent to every Christian in America. Such a blessing

[@joekey8464]

Reagan later told his son, Michael, that his signing of the first No Fault Divorce Law was his "greatest regret" in public life.

[@vinciblegaming6817]

Another week to apply this to the church? I can’t wait!

[@believer8793]

Great teachings. Thank you

[@RejiThomas1]

Excellent interpretation..Thanks a lot

[@catholicguy1073]

Galvin Ortlund did a video on there NOT being 7 Sacraments. Perhaps this would be worth re butting?

[@alonsoACR]

Which one was he denying?

[@julielabrecque6416]

This is beyond excellent!!!

[@follower8815]

I love Thursdays

[@MiserereNobis]

Very informative video 10/10 I never knew what the term Porneia meant

[@mjomalleyfl]

Great podcast and sharp looking flannel 👏 👌 👍

[@henrytucker7189]

I honestly believe this is one of the most important videos you have produced, Joe. I really hope it causes my Protestant brothers to wake up and ask the tough questions. For instance, what does the "Reformers" allowing for divorce have to do with the "Solas?" Why change more than 1,000 years of social policy and teaching by the Church (and State!)? I hope you keep going with this. Check out this sermon from RC Sproul: kzbin.info/www/bejne/nobSfKlmm7SGarc. It's shocking in how bad the scriptural exegesis is. Sproul essentially says that Jesus kept the tradition of Moses and "condescended" to human sinfulness by permitting divorce. He just chose the more conservative party, which argued only divorce for adultery.

[@canibezeroun1988]

This was very good. Thank you Joe. You really cleared up what pornea was.

[@joaoviktortorresairava6978]

Good podcast, but just for your information, canon law still prohibits marrying your in-laws per canon 109. It is called the impediment of affinity.

[@shamelesspopery]

Canon 109 explains what is meant by "affinity" (the relationship created through marriage). It doesn't prohibit marrying in-laws (it's not even a marital canon). The only canonical restriction on marrying in-laws is canon 1092, which says that "affinity in the direct line in any degree invalidates a marriage." In other words, you can't marry a father-in-law, mother-in-law, daughter-in-law, son-in-law, etc., in which you're moving up or down the family tree (that's the "direct line"). But there's no longer a prohibition against marrying a brother-in-law or sister-in-law, which there used to be under Medieval canon law. (This famously was at issue in Henry VIII's attempt to get an annulment from Catherine of Aragorn, who had an unconsummated marriage with Henry's late brother). So the idea of affinity remains now, as then, by (as I said in the video) the particular nuances of how it's applied to marital cases has changed over time.

[@tonyl3762]

Megyn Kelly would benefit from this video, lol

[@coclementsjr]

Really good vid.

[@S7ARK_]

I'm not sure if we should use a divorce chart at all. Technically, we're allowed to legally separate (for protection etc.) but not remarry because our first marriage still binds us until death. Maybe we should consider a chart on remarriage instead? Although, that might not look much better, haha.

[@shamelesspopery]

That's fair, but it's surprisingly hard to find any good data even on the divorce rate, and harder still to find anything on remarriage. (No idea why.) And technically, it should REALLY be something like a "divorce and remarriage without an annulment" chart, but those simply don't exist.

[@user-yr1uq1qe6y]

This is the single thing that makes me realize I’m unwelcome in the Catholic Church. I was cheated on, my ex has remarried a couple of times. It’s been 30 years and I suppose I’m supposed to wait around until she’s done running the field to see 😮

[@jayschwartz6131]

The first question is whether you were validly married according to Catholic Church doctrine and practices that are the result of God's Word. If you were indeed validly married then both of you amd your ex are still married in the eyes of God. In that case your ex has not really remarried but commited adultery regardless of what the laws or men state. In that case your ex is the one who has broken the Covenant with you in which unexcusable promises were made to you and God. Not only your ex failed to you fulfilling those promises, but also failed to God. There were no exceptions to those promises between each other and to God. If on the other hand your marriage was not valid in the eyes of God, but just in the laws of men, then neither of you are actually married but free to marry for real. Note that your ex might have entered and dissolved civil unions three times as you claim but any intimate union that either of you might have engaged with, whether with each other or with anyone else, woule have been ilicit in the eyes of God, regardless of what the laws or traditions of men say about them. If you were/are indeed married in the eyes of God It is entirely up to you if you want to fulfill your marriage promises to God or brake them using your own excuses. As valid as your reasons might appear to be, none of them constitute excusing reasons to break your promises to God and your ex. They might not appear fair to you giving your circumstances, but being unfaithful to those promises will keep you from receiving God's Grace and Eternal Salvation. If you were not actually married under the eyes of God then go obtain the declaration of anulement of your invalid marriage and you will be free to marry for real. Finally, can you show where in the above explanations it is implied that you are not welcome at/by the Catholic Church? Wheter married or unmarried for real, the Church would receive you with her arms open to guide you, teach you, assist you, confort you, counsel you and pour God's Loving Grace over you.

[@user-yr1uq1qe6y]

@@jayschwartz6131 All good points and I’m familiar with the annulment process as I had to participate in the process for my sister’s annulment through the diocese. It was quite a process and luckily in her case clearly eligible for annulment. In my case, the marriage was in the same church of my baptism, lasted 5 years, and from all I understood valid as could be for both of us. Until she decided the grass was greener. I dated an Orthodox women a few times afterwards, but I knew I had to tell her and it was as I suspected a deal breaker for her (or, I should say, her family) which was a shame. And, you are correct, as a much older man now not mixed into the churches “singles” crowd, I am I realize technically welcomed. But I have had really mixed messages about being eligible for participation fully in the Eucharist. I know I was explicitly excluded from doing so in Orthodox but that might have been more about membership.

[@davidmascarenas9830]

The question is do you worship sex/marriage or Jesus? Jesus was emphatic divorce and remarriage is not the proper order. St Paul made clear that marriage is not advised and it is better to be single. Christianity is about glory in the next life, not this life. A serious conversion to Christianity can very well mean taking up the cross of being single. We do not read in the Bible about people converting and then getting married. No, often they were living single till they died.

[@dynamic9016]

Really appreciate this video.

[@erinmarie99]

Stepdaughter marriage example in USA - Woody Allen

[@shamelesspopery]

Oof. Good point!

[@henrytucker7189]

I REALLY want to hear a Protestant rebuttal to this.

[@lianbalbuena914]

Me too. :)

[@dreamweaver3406]

That would be so telling how they would “spin” this teaching from Jesus

[@gregorybarrett4998]

@@dreamweaver3406 My expectation would be that such "rebuttal" would be along the lines of some combination of permission granted in Matthew being sufficient, and the whataboutism of the Church being in no position to object in virtue of the innumerable instances of its members and Magisterium betraying, falsifying, and denying the clear teaching of Scripture. Assuming that I'm correct, the correct reply would be something along the lines of, "We can address each of those in their turn, but right now the issue is whether you actually do what you claim to do and submit to and obey the clear teaching of Scripture even when it wars against your fallen nature. This is a case in point, and it is for you to justify your claim to submit to Scripture in this matter."

[@alonsoACR]

​​@@gregorybarrett4998That is true and honest whatabaoutism. The Church isn't being hypocritical here, the teaching pairs up with Scripture. Unfortunately, I do see that coming as well. The hardest part of debunking Protestantism is that you have nothing to debunk. It flows like water, no fixed doctrine, nothing is left undoubted and uncontested. It attacks and shrinks back, hidden beneath a muddy water of conflicting teachings on the essentials. A system for freely propagating heresy, and calling it good for its diversity. Built from the ground up within the basis of pride, where personal presuppositions are the default and unshaken, periodically taking a swim to another sect which may better fit your unruly passions, within this infernal mud. A pit where the salvations of many are put at risk. These days, where Satan seems to rule most plainly, where people follow the Christ they wish, not the Christ that is. Long ago, the heretic used to pride himself in not being a heretic, but a supporter of perennial doctrine. The heterodox claimed to be orthodox. Now, you see many of the baptized take pride in their heresy and their innovation. The epitome of pride rests on them, deriding all our fathers in the faith as outdated - as if the Eternal Omnipotence can be outdated. Modernism is a cancer upon the Christian Church.

[@tytyvyllus8298]

This was excellent. Thanks.

[@billyhw5492]

This is really good except for the last 5 minutes. Bishops need to approve separations, and a failed marriage is not evidence of marriage nullity.

[@davidmascarenas9830]

Agreed, everyone is always trying to find an excuse as opposed to live the reality of Christianity. It may technically be the case many marriages are invalid because the Church has practically stopped teaching. But this needs to end. Annulment should be very rare.

[@DenverDias]

To actually read the Bible is to cease to be a pr*testant.

[@susand3668]

Well said! The bible brought me into the Catholic Church.

[@wawrzys9824]

Why id Mt 5,32 still translated as adultary even in catholic Bibles? As a catholic i knew that divorce is impossible but i never knew why did Jesus say it. This video finally makes sense of it, thank you Joe. There should at least be some commentary explaining this in the bibles.

[@alonsoACR]

It isn't though? What translation are you looking at? NABRE: unless the marriage is unlawful NCB: except if the marriage was unlawful NRSVCE (which is kinda secular and denomination agnostic, not truly Catholic) : except on the ground of unchastity Douay-Rheims: excepting for the cause of fornication I can't think of any other Church approved translation in English. None say adultery.

[@wawrzys9824]

@@alonsoACR I'm looking at my polish version, and i dont think unchastity or fornication are helpful here

[@alonsoACR]

@@wawrzys9824 the point of the video is that unchastity and fornication are valid translations. You have to remember, my Polish brother in the faith, that Matthew is a book rife and very clearly intended to those quite well informed about 1st century Judaism. It's not a long book, but it still has almost 200 references to the Old Testament detected so far, and more to Jewish tradition, with the number growing every passing age. A Greek Jew, of which there were many, especially among the first connverts to Christianity, would indeed use porneia to refer to marriages that were not marriages. It would be sex out of matrimony, therefore, fornication and unchastity. That's literally what fornication means. If you don't split up, the sin you incur is not adultery, it's fornication. The clause is, as many of Christ's clauses, intended to avoid the situation where one is forced to sin. Adultery if you split, fornication if you don't. That was a question a Jew may have had. I've been checking over a dozen translations in languages I can kind of get the meaning (as a Spanish speaker) and found it's almost always "fornication" or "illegal/invalid marriage" or "illicit union". Worryingly enough, I did find a couple that used adultery, but those were rare. The Vulgate Bible says "Omnis qui dimiserit uxorem sua, excepta fornicationis causa, facit eam moechari" Two notes here: First, it's likely the trend of translating it as fornication in Catholic bibles comes from St. Jerome himself; and, second, the Vulgata curiously just loaned that "moechari" from Greek, instead of using a proper Latin word. For what it's worth, the Latin could reasonably be translated as "unless it causes fornication" Anyway. Fornication is a fine enough translation. As a bonus my personal translation from the Latin: "I also tell you(plural): Every man who dismisses(or divorces) his wife, excepting the fornication cause, makes her an adulteress; and (the person) who the dismissed marries, commits adultery." I don't know Greek, but Joe did that one already in the video iirc. The Latin alone, to me, hints that there are marriages which involve fornication. The marriage itself is fornicator-y basically.

[@sighi28]

Hi there Mr. Heschmeyer, Can you do a talk on the Orthodox position about divorce and remarriage ? ( how they justify it based on the bible, if it was like that before 1054, etc ). Thank you!

[@user-pg2wm9jd9p]

Great explanation, thanks for clearing it up.

[@BeauBeckwith]

So good. Thank you

[@genemyersmyers6710]

Can a marriage be anald if one who ask for annulment was caught in adultery ?and was divorced by her husband.

[@gregorybarrett4998]

Insufficient data. The question is not whether one or another party sinned in this way or that, but rather whether the marriage was valid when contracted, was sacramental, and affects the vocation of the parties.

[@AnnulmentProof]

Marital cases are simple unless you change the essential purpose of marriage from objective to subjective.

[@AnnulmentProof]

One can put away their spouse for cheating, but never divorce for cheating. "..he that keepeth an adulteress, is foolish and wicked." Prov 18:22

[@ScorpionSting24]

Is there a single source or several sources that we can refer to regarding the origin of the Protestant theology on marriage and divorce? After watching this it’s really hard to wrap my mind around the misinterpretation of scripture.

[@tynnmahn]

Especially given the sad state of western society and the fact that even God fearing Christians of all stripes (protestant, catholic, orthodox) in the west are affected by the current, bad, view of what marriage should be, I feel that mother church should do what you just did on a large scale. I have been a life long catholic and have been of married to one woman. This is a result, largely by no other reason than by the Grace of God, because I did NOT know, or understand what you have just laid out here. I just had a vague belief that marriage is a sacred, life long covenant between you, your spouse and God. TLDR: Current catechesis in the church should take a cue from what you just did here so that every Catholic understands what you just explained.

[@susand3668]

There is also the part of Catholicism that is "caught, not taught" -- thank God! Catholics do not always "know" things in their heads that they "know" in their hearts, because of the Holy Spirit and the efficacy of the Sacraments! So, bless you for following our Lord! And thank you for your lived example of the Grace of God!

[@joekey8464]

We must understand that - marriage is a vow before God. It is a solemn promise of the couple to God. The priest is just a witness to the ceremony. "In the name of God, I, take you, to be my wife/husband,... for better, for worse,.....until parted by death. This is my solemn vow." I really do not know how to break a promise to God. Would anyone even dare break a promise to God.

[@simondeep]

Great explanation. Pretty much why King Herod’s family was such a mess to St John the Baptist

[@thunderstruck6647]

29:06 Just out of curiosity the thing that I did hear is that Porniea (sp?) was used for general sexual deviancy, anything from prostitution to bestiality, etc., while adultery was something specific and given that distinction.

[@SpokenThroughLeo]

I have a 50 page script I want to turn into a video on this topic that will be the most comprehensive overview of this topic in video format. I’ll probably have it done in the summer. Subscribe if this is a topic you are interested in!

[@shawnlabadie]

It's obvious to me that most of the people commenting on this thread have absolutely no idea of the immense amount of pain and suffering an abandoned spouse is subjected to as the result of a a divorce. A divorce you neither wanted or desired and tried to avoid. I know this pain, because I've lived it and continue to live it. I then had to suffer through the ridiculous annulment process (and it WAS ridiculous) that is fraught with incompetence and secrecy only to be told that that you are still married and that you must live the rest of your life alone and miserable and if you don't you are an unrepentant sinner who can't receive the sacraments and you have no hope for mercy or love and you will go to Hell unless you comply. God IS love, why would He make a rule that condemns the abandoned spouse to a life separate from their vocation of marriage? Why would He tell the person in the marriage who is actually trying to honor the vows that THEY are the sinner just because they want to live out their vocation with another person after being denied that option due to no fault of their own from their original spouse? Where is the justice in this? Where is God's love in this? Are you telling me that the creator of the universe, who died on a cross after a brutal crucifixion for the forgiveness of sins for all time desires to condemn an innocent person who's only mistake was picking a bad spouse? This is an injustice and although I don't get any revelation from anyone, It's incredibly hard for me to believe that this is how it's supposed to have been.

[@stephengolding8309]

I was struck by your comment. It's hard to imagine the depths of the suffering you have experienced through divorce. I do believe that Jesus understands your pain better than anyone else because he suffered in the most unimaginable way. Perhaps take comfort from the instruction Peter gives shortly after requiring us to be subject to church authority: "Humble yourselves, therefore, under the mighty hand of God so that at the proper time he may exalt you, casting all your anxieties on him, because he cares for you." (1 Peter 5:6-7) This is not how it's supposed to have been. Your spouse was supposed to love you and honour their commitments to you and God. But they have abandoned their promises and duties, leaving you alone. It's an incredibly hard thing for you to now live out your calling, which is to be like Hosea who was faithful despite Gomer's unfaithfulness. But your devotion to God and the promises you made serves as a powerful witness to those around you. You could choose to live out life being alone and miserable - or you could decide to live out a life being intimately joined in union to God here on earth and then forevermore in eternity. It may not be possible to be physically joined to your spouse, but choose to be joined to God. In the end, that's all that matters.

[@ndeloaasonganyi4066]

Hi Joe, wonderful video, I always enjoy your content. One critique/ point I would like your response to. When you talk about the step-mom and dad are one (in marriage), that could be taken as polygamy being ok. I am not sure if you mean in this case the previous wife (the offender's mother in this case) is dead and the father remarries or just in general, but it can be confusing. I say that because I'm of an African background, and a lot of people still argue that the Bible doesn't say anything against polygamy, so it can be acceptable. So, saying a step mom, when my mom is still married to my dad, is one with my dad, is admitting that a man can be married to 2 or more women and they all are one. I hope that makes sense.

[@clarekappenman5564]

Hmm, that's an interesting question. I had taken it to mean a man taking his stepmom who joined the family after the first wife died, since early death of a wife was not uncommon at that time. Joe mentions that he doesn't know of any modern cases like this, but I actually know of one, thirdhand. I thought of 1 Corinthians when I heard of it. There is another passage in 1 Corinthians in which Paul says relations with a prostitute creates a one-flesh union with her; but he doesn't say whether the man in that situation is committing adultery, vs. fornication. But I guess none of that directly answers your question. Yes, Joe should take up the question of polygamy for sure!

[@drjaybirdc]

With the coming of Christ, He has provided the whole human race with graces to practice monogamy, such as were not available before the incarnation. Christians witness this fact to the whole world. In the early church, it was noted, “among them wise self-control is found, monogamy is observed, and chastity is preserved.” (Theophilus of Antioch, Ad Autolychum,3,15).

[@susand3668]

Polygamy is forbidden from the first marriage -- that of Adam and his wife in Genesis 2:23 "...and they shall be made one flesh." Note that the indication of increasing wickedness in the line of Cain was when Lamech married 2 women (Genesis 4:19). I know that there are those in Africa who try to change the teaching of the Catholic church to allow for polygamy. It is very similar to the efforts of those in the US and Europe who want to change the teaching of the Catholic Church to allow for same-sex unions. The Church will not be changing. Jesus has promised to protect the Church in all her teachings.

[@joshanderson8566]

I love the video. I'm wondering if you could help point me to some church fathers who say the samething. I read the Catena Aurea and didn't find the same explanation as the one you gave. I haven't read Mark and Luke in the Catena, will do that now. Thanks for your hard work!

[@AnnulmentProof]

What is the difference between "put away" and "divorce?"

[@rexfordtugwelljr]

I can’t think of a funner way 😁for a spouse to justify divorce, remarry and remain in the Lord’s good grace than to commit adultery. seriously though, I wonder how many marriages have failed just because of this one flawed, tragic reading of Matthew.

[@TheLjdevlin86]

Thank you for this message as marriage is serious and from the church. Couples need to stop getting married in Meadows by their online officiant trans cousin- this downplays the Sacrament on many levels. Get married in the church!! ⛪️

[@davido3026]

During the time of The Lord Jesus on earth there were unlawful marriages, and they do exist today, and therefore are not valid. The only authority to establish that is the church with authority to bind and loose on earth and heaven!!

[@frapaschal6594]

@35:27 "And you're just like, "Wait a second. Are they saying be careful how you eat your burger and also don't commit adultery?"

[@wbl5649]

My friend who considers herself a devout Evangelical has been divorced times. Her last marriage was to a man at her church. It lasted a year. I couldn't believe her pastor performed their marriage ceremony. What kind of pastor performs a wedding of a 5th wedding..smh.

[@geoffjs]

Relativism of Protestantism with its many “truths”!

[@jbell0243]

Your objection to the one cheated on being able to initiate divorce is unconvincing. It’s not a leap to say the only one with moral standing to imitate divorce is the violated. It’s not in the text explicitly but there is a canon against absurdity

[@haydongonzalez-dyer2727]

love it

[@selohcin]

Oof... that's brutal. So, if I marry and my wife divorces me, I'm not allowed to marry anyone else for the rest of my life?? That's awful. (I'm not saying it's wrong, but it's certainly awful.) This explanation makes it unmistakable why the disciples thought it was better to never marry. The fact that your wife could leave you for selfish reasons and then you'd be stuck being alone for the rest of your life is unbearable for some.

[@tookie36]

Yes but there is always Christ to have a relationship with. So the “consolation” prize ain’t half bad

[@gabrielseth5142]

Semi-followup/semi-clarification question: what is a permissible reaction to having a line crossed with your spouse that you have a hard time stomaching? If I had a wife and she was cheating on me or if a woman found out her husband was having relations with men, do we still have an obligation to try and restore the marriage to how it was prior? Are we allowed to seperate as long as we don't have the intention of remarrying? What's up, what's the solution to this or is it just down to "try harder"?

[@Chicken_of_Bristol]

The Catechism says in paragraph 2383 "The separation of spouses while maintaining the marriage bond can be legitimate in certain cases provided for by canon law. If civil divorce remains the only possible way of ensuring certain legal rights, the care of the children, or the protection of inheritance, it can be tolerated and does not constitute a moral offense." If you are in the unfortunate circumstance you described above, you should talk with a priest. Basically, in principle, you can probably civilly divorce your spouse (especially clearly in the case that unrepentant and continued adultery risks the safety of your children), but understand that your legal status as far as the government is concerned would not reflect your spiritual status and that the Church does not consider you free to remarry someone else, though if you did end up reconciling with your spouse, you could civilly remarry them. It would also probably be worth trying to determine if your spouse actually ever intended to keep their marriage vows in the first place. If that or some other defect of consent were present at the time you got married, then you would qualify for an annulment since you wouldn't have been joined together in God's eyes in the first place.

[@gregorybarrett4998]

@@Chicken_of_Bristol An just to follow up, the inured party does have the right but not the duty to demand the return of the betrayer, whereas the betrayer has no such right.

[@jamesmisfeldt264]

Woody Allen would be a notable example of someone who married their step child.

[@andrefouche9682]

Looking at the number of annulments these days it seems to be very difficult to get “joined together by God”.

[@Chicken_of_Bristol]

According to the USCCB, I can't find data from the last couple of years, but in 2014, there were about 150,000 marriages in the US and under 25000 declarations of nullity granted. That means about 1 in 6 attempts to contract marriage may be invalid, using back of the envelope math. Do you have more recent data than I was able to find? 1 in 6 failure rate doesn't seem to me like it's "very difficult" to get joined together by God.

[@susand3668]

Dear@@Chicken_of_Bristol, do your statistics show how many of the declarations of nullity were granted to converts into the Catholic Church? Considering how many stories we hear of annulments being necessary for a couple to validate their marriage contracted in a Protestant church, I am thinking the number may be larger than if they are only purely Catholic marriages being declared null. And I am assuming that the statistics from the USCCB on marriages were only counting marriages contracted in the Catholic Church? Since the Church also recognizes as valid every church wedding, that number would probably be artificially small? I mean, it seems to me that it just might be an impossible task to figure out the real proportion of annulments to marriages.

[@Chicken_of_Bristol]

@@susand3668 Unfortunately, they do not explicitly say, that's why I asked if you had better data. I'm actually not certain why you consider this problematic, however. Even if we assume that that the majority of non-Catholics are living in invalid marriages, I wouldn't even necessarily expect them to have the right mindset on marriage. They're not Catholic, so they don't have the right mindset on a lot of gravely important issues. Marriage isn't uniquely problematic.

[@susand3668]

Dear@@Chicken_of_Bristol, my little brain went chasing after the statistics, that's all. I have heard so many Catholics bemoan the high numbers of declarations of nullity in the Church nowadays (in the part of the Church with which we are familiar), and I was kind-of hoping that there was some way to get an accurate idea of annulments as compared with marriages. Bless you, and keep the Faith!!

[@Chicken_of_Bristol]

@@susand3668 For some reason, I didn't realize that you weren't the original commenter. Bless you as well.

[@carolinajackson7621]

"Porneias" means sexual immorality in genera, & that includes physical adultery. Yes, even if there is another more specific word for adultery

[@AmberDalton-jg7eu]

Adultery in the first century meant death. People aren't put to death for adultery in our day. Of course adultery is not part of pornia due to the time era the betrayed spouse is now a widow....we don't have that option now. Doesn't seem fair. That this era one has to live with an unfaithful spouse or a life being single due to the era we live in