Very powerful article.
The disturbing problem in America today is that divorce has become so acceptable with even protestant pastors seeing no problem that it in effect has created church sponsored fornication and resulted in broken families in a huge percentage of homes.
I detest the idea that this clause was a later addition, in other words a corruption of the original text. That is not the road those sources should have gone down. I had NO idea protestant scholars were making such claims.
One key detail I didnt see you mention here (though you probably have elsewhere) was the fact that this clause only occurs in Matthew, yet Matthew is the only gospel that mentions a unlawful marriage!
Matt 1:
18This is how the birth of Jesus Christ came about: His mother Mary was pledged to be married to Joseph, but before they came together, she was found to be with child through the Holy Spirit. 19Because Joseph her husband was a righteous man and did not want to expose her to public disgrace, he had in mind to divorce her quietly.
With this in mind the exception clause makes sense and fits the Catholic understanding.
It is essential to point out, which you did, that the two words Jesus uses are not the same. Many translations say something to the effect "except for adultery/fornication...commits adultery" which is wrong because those two words are not the same. Another point to make is that in Jn 8:41 the Jews say to Jesus:
"You are doing the deeds of your father " They said to Him, "We were not born of fornication; we have one Father: God."
Here they were accusing Jesus of being a bastard, and the term for "fornication" is the same term used in the exception clause of Matthew. Thus more evidence Jesus was talking about some type of unlawful marriage.
I have pointed out on Carm's forums that even conservative protestants like Matt Slick cannot oppose divorce (and stay consistent with his OSAS theology) because he has an article on divorce where he makes it clear salvation is not in jeopardy and in fact his article allows divorce very easily.
http://www.carm.org/questions/di...ons/
divorce.htm
That's an excellent point you make, Nick. I don't think I noticed that particular thing before. Very good. I will make sure to link to this discussion when I post the article in my index pages, so it can be preserved.
Nick,
Very powerful article.
I second that.
The disturbing problem in America today is that divorce has become so acceptable with even protestant pastors seeing no problem that it in effect has created church sponsored fornication and resulted in broken families in a huge percentage of homes.
“Church sponsored fornication?” Interesting. Who knows, maybe it’s just these “pastors” trying to return to their roots.
http://books.google.com/books?id...+fornication%
22
One thing is certain, there will always be those (both Catholic and Protestant) who , sadly, want to transform the “good news” into the “easy news.” How different this is from the teaching of the holy apostle that
“we must through much tribulation enter into the kingdom of God.” Acts 14: 22
http://www.biblestudytools.net/O...kjv&
showtools=0
Dave,
Thanks for championing the Church’s constant teaching on this matter. Your article only served to further strengthen my conviction that the Church is indeed the “pillar and foundation of the truth” or, as some translations have it, the “pillar and bulwark of the truth.”
http://www.biblestudytools.net/O...UTH&
version=rsv
And surely this means, to paraphrase Luther slightly, that:
“A mighty fortress is The Church, a bulwark never failing” 
I'm glad it was helpful to you Ben. All glory to God for His mercies and His moral teachings. Only when we follow them (and Him) will we be truly fulfilled and joyful, even during difficult times.
Jesus was clearly against divorce, and if Jesus is against something, WE should be against it too. I haven't done extensive research to see why many of my PT brethren are so accepting of this practice except that Ben M. is absolutely right when he said,
One thing is certain, there will always be those (both Catholic and Protestant) who , sadly, want to transform the “good news” into the “easy news.” How different this is from the teaching of the holy apostle that
“we must through much tribulation enter into the kingdom of God.” Acts 14: 22
I do however have great difficulty in condemning divorce but then allowing for annulments. Dave wrote,
Too often, Catholics marry outside the Church or they enter into "second marriages" without the benefit of an annulment (a declaration that the proper conditions for a valid, sacramental marriage were not present from the beginning). It is also almost certainly true that some annulments being granted are done without proper cause. The process is likely being abused, because the numbers of annulments in the United States have so greatly increased. On the other hand, as Catholics understand less and less what is involved in a sacramental, Catholic marriage, it is more likely that annulments will increase, because of that very ignorance. (bold added by Grubb)
If one takes a marriage vow, shouldn't he keep it? What's an example of an invalid and/or unsacremental marriage? One that occurred in Vegas while drunk?
"Annulment" seems like a euphemism for "valid, acceptable, church sanctioned divorce". What's the difference? A divorce by any other name is still a divorce, right? And would you agree there are some grounds for a valid divorce in a PTC just as there are grounds for annulments in the RCC? If not, why not?
.
Boilerplate objections, that I have long since answered (if I do say so):
Dialogue: Annulment vs. Divorce
http://socrates58.blogspot.com/2...vorce-
with.html
Biblical Evidence for Annulments
http://socrates58.blogspot.com/
2...annulments.html
Dave,
So can all PTs get annulments from their "marriages" since they weren't entered into in a sacramentally valid way?
.
I read this article long ago: http://members.aol.com/johnprh/m...h/
marriage.html
and have wondered. As I understand it the author of the article is interpreting "pornea" to mean, in Catholic terms, an invalid marriage. Maybe other wiser heads can look it over and see if it makes sense.
Grubb,
Actually, many Protestants have sacramental marriages, from the Catholic perspective. If neither partner was ever Catholic (or married before, etc.), and desire to have children, it is regarded as a sacramental marriage. If one was Catholic, then it is a defect of form, and has to be sacramentalized.
That was the case in my own marriage. My wife was raised Catholic, so she messed up (a source of much lighthearted teasing from me) and so we went through the ceremony again when I was received into the Catholic Church, and she returned.
Commenting by HaloScan
