Prof. Felix Otten, O.P. and C.F. Pauwels, O.P.

Editor’s Note: This article continues the series of straightforward responses to frequently-encountered questions and objections concerning the Catholic Faith. The questions and answers are adapted from Professor Felix Otten, O.P. and C.F. Pauwels, O.P.’s The Most Frequently Encountered Difficulties, published originally in Dutch in 1939.

Catholics say that marriage is indissoluble. But how can they reconcile that teaching with the words of Christ: “Whoever divorces his wife, except in the case of adultery, and marries another commits adultery?” (Mt. 19:9). For those words clearly indicate that a man may remarry after his wife’s adultery.

These words are often played out as a difficulty against the indissolubility of marriage; and they are then reinforced by another text, viz.: “Whoever divorces his wife, except in the case of adultery, causes her to commit adultery” (Mt. 5:32).

Now, however, one must be careful in explaining scriptures and not always looking at them in isolation; one has to compare them with other texts, and this often clarifies a lot of obscure things.

Now there are plenty of passages in Holy Scripture that clearly say that marriage is indissoluble, and that he or she who remarries during the life of the other party commits adultery. For example, we can compare Mk. 10:11-12: “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her. And if a woman divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.” Christ speaks there without exception: both the sender and the sent-away always commit adultery when entering into a new marriage.

The teaching of the Apostle Paul is also clear. He writes: “It is not I, but the Lord who commands the married that the woman should not separate from the man; and if she is divorced, she must remain unmarried or be reconciled with the man” and: “A woman is bound as long as her husband lives” (I Cor. 7:10-11 & 39). The texts may raise a difficulty for some and must therefore be read in the light of the other quoted texts. And what is their meaning then?

Christ means this: Whoever casts off his wife unjustly commits the sin of adultery, because he puts her in danger of sin without lawful cause: as a divorced wife she is in danger of committing adultery. If, on the other hand, he sends her away because she herself has broken the marriage fidelity, he is not responsible for the following sins of the woman, because he exercises his right to send her away. Christ teaches, therefore, that the breaking off of marital society in the event of adultery is permissible, but always while preserving the unbreakable marriage bond. And thus, the texts found in Matthew prove nothing against the indissolubility of marriage.

 

Catholics say that marriage is indissoluble. In practice, however, some marriages can be dissolved by the pope. How can that be reconciled?

A validly concluded marriage and consummated by the conjugal act cannot be dissolved. That is not an ecclesiastical but divine right, and the pope cannot change that. But the pope can do other things that may be regarded as a dissolution of marriage by inexperienced or superficial people.

In the first place, he can declare that a marriage is invalid. This is not an annulment of an existing marriage, but a decision that there has never actually been a marriage, even though a marriage of convenience had been consecrated in church. For example, if there was an invalidating marriage impediment, which was not dispensed with for whatever reason, or if one of the parties was unable to enter into a valid marriage, because that party was not mentally competent, or if one of the parties refused to give the consent, then there has never been a valid marriage. That can now be examined in Rome by trial, and then the pope can officially declare the invalidity. That is not the dissolution of a marriage.

In some cases, the pope can also dissolve a marriage that has been validly concluded but not consummated by the conjugal act. Such a papal dispensation is a favor sometimes granted for very serious reasons. Then it could be said that something is dissolved, but then it only concerns a marriage that was not yet completed.

And then, finally, there is the mysterious privilege of which the Apostle Paul speaks: “If a brother has an unbelieving wife, and she consents to dwell with him, let him not cast her off; also, if a woman has an unbelieving husband, and he consents to dwell with her, she may not cast off the husband… But if the unbeliever desires to divorce, let him divorce; in such cases the brother and sister are not bound” (I Cor. 7: 12-15).

Only in this case is there a dissolution of a validly concluded and consummated marriage, which was not a sacramental or Christian marriage. But that exception is made on the express teaching of the Apostle Paul for a very special case, and surely no one can blame the pope for that.

We can therefore safely say that the pope adheres completely to the indissolubility of marriage. Either he only pronounces the invalidity; or he annuls an unconsummated marriage; or he applies the privilege of Paul.