IT IS CRUEL TO BAN DIVORCE AS THE CATHOLIC CHURCH DOES
Marriage is a contract but Christian teaching sees it as something biological where a man fits a woman as well. The contract is made and God is called in to make the contract so he has a say on whether he will or will not allow it to be terminated. Jesus says he makes it lifelong.
The Roman Catholic Church absolutely prohibits divorce and states that it is contrary to natural law – is unnatural. It appeals to reason, the Bible and Tradition to bolster this ban. Yet after saying this, incredibly an Eastern Orthodox Catholic who gets a divorce in his Church is allowed to marry a Roman Catholic without looking for an annulment! (page 164, Rome has Spoken). That is unfair.
For Christians, marriage is a supernatural bond between one man and one woman
for life. It is also a natural bond and involves a contract. The view of some
that marriage is just a contract or mainly that means that it is God's choice
that it will be lifelong. He could make it temporary if he wished. But in the
Bible marriage is more than just a contract but unites man and woman into a warm
intimate combination.
Jesus banned divorce completely. The Jews said to him that Moses allowed
divorce, as in facilitating a legal certificate of divorce, and they wanted to
know if it could be allowed for any reason whatsoever. He said they knew the
answer for they read that God made them male and female and thus a man will
leave his parents and become one with his wife. The argument that Jesus was
thinking of women discarded by their husbands and the injustice this could cause
is not in the text at all. He goes back to God's original design. It then is not
about if divorce is good for women or not. There is no hint that he knew women
who had that experience. He even banned women from divorcing though they could
not in those days. He bans women from divorcing their husbands which is his hint
that this is not about protecting women. That is another topic.
The apostles understandably reacted by saying that it is better for a man not to
marry at all. Jesus didn't contradict them but stated that God makes it possible
for some to keep the law that divorce is always wrong and not just wrong but
invalid. This point is put in to help us see that Jesus' no means no. It is
understandable if you feel marriage is off-putting if you cannot divorce.
Some feel that Matthew 19 has Jesus talk as if God arranges all marriages and brings man and woman together which is why divorce is so wrong. He says what God has joined man must not divide. If so, then God knows what he is doing matching a couple so if they separate it is their own fault. This is a very cruel and insulting idea. Some think God does not arrange marriages but ratifies them and make them binding. But that is no comfort either - they are still being blamed.
When Christ said that Moses had to permit the Hebrews to divorce when they would
have rebelled if he hadn’t he was lying for these forced many vehemently
despised rules on them. It is cruel to hurt people with broken marriages over
the teaching of a man who lied when giving that teaching.
The argument that Jesus is contradicting the Old Testament scripture here is
false. The Law of Moses speaks of a culture in which divorce happens but there
is no commandment permitting divorce. So if Moses made a commandment it is his
own not God's. Jesus never once corrected any Old Testament law and indeed said
only false prophets say any law in the Scriptures is in any way inferior or not
of God.
The Bible says that husbands and wives are to love one another meaning that they
can do so for God only commands what is possible (Ephesians 5:28). This makes
marital breakdown to be one or both of their faults.
The Bible would have to see marriage as being only for children when there was
no birth-control in those days meaning that having children was a duty and would
keep the marriage happy. This was a lie for it didn’t have to be necessarily
true!
Marriage infers that divorce is wrong for it endeavours to tie two people
together without any concern for them and by treating them dishonestly. When it
does that it could hardly infer that divorce could ever be permissible. If you
are to love the sinner and hate the sin then you are to act as if something in
the sinner is sinning and not the sinner in which case divorce could never be
right. Divorce would be wrong for if marriage is good then you love the person
as good as if the sin was something separate from the person. You would not be
able to penalise the sin by getting rid of the person in a divorce or
separation. If a terrible deceit would justify divorce then it follows that you
can get a divorce just because somebody married you for marriage is deceit.
Religion hypocritically says that marriage vows bind for life while other vows
such as to be a nun for life do not. The Catholic Church will not release you
from your marriage vows, but a nun can be released from lifelong vows. Vows
exist to express commitment and to create order in society. So the Church says.
And yet it claims the power to render a vow to be of no effect from that time
on. The Old Testament gives regulations from God for dealing with people who
made vows and who want to be free from them.
Roman Catholicism could allow some exceptions to the ban on divorce and
remarriage. It allows killing in some circumstances and that doesn’t mean that
everybody starts killing. To forbid a young childless wife from getting married
again after her husband runs off with her money and best friend never to return
is unkind in the extreme. The Church claims that it is right to do this because
it is necessary to prevent people from deserting their spouses so that both of
them can get out of their marriage and try it again with a new partner. This
won’t happen enough to justify a blanket ban – and it could be watched out for.
Jesus could not have been good if he was against divorce under all
circumstances.
If the Church feels that the law will eventually get more liberal with the
passing of time if it allows divorce at all then it should oppose the law of the
land and set itself up as ruler for it is more trustworthy. The fact that some
people will abuse divorce does not mean that it ought to be banned completely.
Banning divorce is not going to help keep the marriage together. When a husband
and wife do not get along and cannot mend their differences they will find it
easier to tolerate one another if they can leave easily and divorce is
available. Banning divorce makes them feel they have to stay together and suffer
and that leads to resentment and will lead to an abrupt break-up just because
the pressure is unbearable and will reach a breaking point. That will devastate
the children. It is a mistake pointing to statistics to argue that divorce leads
to more divorce for nobody can judge. It could be that most of these marriages
should be ended anyway.
It is said that divorce makes marriage vows insincere for they include promising
to remain faithful to the partner until the parting of death while planning to
divorce if things go wrong contradicts this. If that vow were essential for a
valid marriage then no one who believes in divorce or separation could contract
a valid marriage. But if separation agrees with that vow then divorce must too.
It would appear that the Church is obsessed with power and so would be better
off if it did allow divorce for that would put the numbers of babies being born
up. That drives some to say that its leaders must ban divorce out of spite and
jealousy. Banning divorce was very useful in the era when both parents had the
role of brainwashing the child into being a good or at least a convinced
Catholic and it was necessary to keep the family together to get the job done
thoroughly. The Church still bans divorce in the hope of seeing the world go
back to all that.
If sex is giving your whole self to another person which is what the Church
teaches, then how can it be right to look for a new partner or wife or husband
if that person dies? To say I give myself to you until divorce if it happens is
putting a condition on it as much as saying I give myself to you until you die
is. It is not giving your whole self. If you give your whole self to a person
you will be like the person who having lost their beloved wife or husband
refuses to even think about a new partner for they loved the old partner so
much. In Christianity, marriage ends only by death. What if in the future you
die and are revived? If you married and wanted to marry, you could get killed in
a hospital so that you can die and be brought back to life again a free man or
woman. The Church couldn’t possibly deny that it succeeds in dissolving the
marriage or ending it leaving you free to marry again. Some day it may be
possible. In that day, people will see how silly it is to oppose divorce for
this will amount to the same thing. The Church should allow divorce.
Even if this is not possible, it would be the same if it could happen – people
will be wishing it could be done and if that is acceptable then these people are
ending marriages in their hearts. It is just like when Jesus said that if you
lust for a woman you sin in your heart with her even if you never touch her.
The Church professes to have compassion for those whose marriages have broken
down and who want to be with a new partner or who wish to remarry. The Church
says then it suffers with them and wishes to help. What is this compassion then
but an admission that they know fine well they are wrecking lives and trying to
wreck them? If we may use an extreme example to drive home the point, a man
wants to rape a child you don’t say, “I feel so sorry that I cannot let you do
this.” What you are really saying is that it is not wrong to rape the child but
you won’t allow it. The Church cannot have any compassion for people who want a
new partner after marriage breakdown. It can hardly have compassion that the
marriage broke down in a lot of cases for God supposedly helps marriage to
survive for it is a sacrament. If a husband wouldn’t stop beating his wife so
the marriage had to end that would be different but the Church cannot have
compassion for unhappy marriages that are not as bad as that.
The Catholic religion says that people living together before marriage makes the
marriage more likely to end in divorce. There is no mention of the fact that
religion encourages the notion that marriage is for life. That makes people
suspicious of commitment for that is a mad ideal. Thus they start to live
together and their fear that the relationship may be only temporary kicks in and
causes trouble.