This article is a refutation of the Mormon doctrine of Eternal Marriage written in the style of the Summa Theologica of St. Thomas Aquinas. The hope of this author is to write more articles similar to this one regarding Mormon teaching.
Objection 1. It seems that marriage is eternal and lasts beyond our mortal lives. For it is written that in the Garden, God brought Eve unto Adam and that: "therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife, and they shall be one flesh" (Gen. 2:24) At this time there was no death, and so this marriage would have lasted for eternity save for the fall of man. Since this marriage is used by our Lord to model the correct doctrine of marriage against the false doctrine of the Pharisees (Mt. 19:5, Mk 10:7-8) and by the Apostle as the model of marriage for those in the Church (1 Co. 6:16, Eph. 5:31), then it should be concluded that the ordinance of marriage, when celebrated in accordance with the doctrine and law of God's Church, is eternal.
Objection 2. Further, our Lord said: "What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder" (Mk. 10:9). If, therefore, marriage is not to end in this life, it follows that marriage is to continue into the life of the world to come.
Objection 3. Further, when our Lord refutes the Sadducees regarding the resurrection, our Lord does not say: "in the resurrection none are married," but rather: "in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage" (Mt. 22:30). Consequently, it seems that our Lord is not condemning the continuance of marriage in the resurrection, but the celebration of new marriages in the resurrection.
Objection 4. Further, concerning the Sadducees, it would not be proper for our Lord to give his full, comprehensive, and definitive teaching on marriage here, for far be it from the Lord to cast pearls before swine (Mt. 7:6). Consequently, it seems that our Lord is not condemning eternal marriage.
Objection 5. Further, Tertullian said: "We who shall be with God shall be together, since we shall all be with the one God... in which God will still less separate those whom He has conjoined, than in this lesser life He forbids them to be separated" (On Monogamy ch. X). Therefore, the Early Church believed in Eternal Marriage.
On the contrary, for the Apostle says: "a woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband" (Rm. 7:2). The Apostle continues that, in being loosed of the law of marriage she does not commit adultery by marrying another man. Therefore, since the law of adultery does not apply to her, the marital relationship terminates upon the death of one of the spouses.
I answer that in this present life, marriage is an indissoluble sacrament between one man and one woman who are legally able to be married under the Divine and Ecclesiastical laws. For those bound in a sacramental marriage, nothing is able to end that marriage during this life, and therefore divorce is not only prohibited, but it is nonexistent. There is a difference between indissolubility and virtual indissolubility: a marriage which has not been consummated is virtually indissoluble, and can only be dissolved by the Vicar of Christ; marriages that have been consummated are indissoluble and end only by death.
The Church does, however, allow for annulments. An annulment is not an Ecclesiastically-sanctioned divorce, but rather a legal declaration that a sacramental marriage was not truly contracted due to a lack of either form or matter of the sacrament. This does not negate the reality that a civil marriage took place or that it seemed (even to the ostensibly wed) that a man and a woman were truly married, but instead that the sacrament of matrimony was not validly contracted.
The matter required for marriage is a man and a woman who are both validly baptized (that is immersed in or poured over with water in the Name of the Trinity), that they are free to marry (meaning they are not under duress or constraint and are legally allowed to marry according to Church law), and that they consent to marriage (meaning that they consent to remain married for life and remain open to bearing and raising Catholic children). The form is according to the canons of the Church. An annulment can be granted on the grounds that any one of these was not met prior to or during the celebration of the sacrament.
Upon death, the marriage is no longer binding and any living spouse is free to remarry. In the first resurrection which follows the particular judgement of souls, marriage as it is known on earth is impossible because we lack physical bodies and are incapable of expressing marital relations. In the second resurrection following the final judgement, we obtain our glorified physical bodies, but are celibate and exist "as the angels" according to our Lord's teaching.
Reply to Objection 1. The state in which man lived in the Garden of Eden is different from the state in which he will live in the resurrection, for in the Garden, Adam's body was not glorified, but only supernaturally sustained unto immortality. After the Fall, Man's natural state and his relationship with all created things, including his wife, were altered (Gen. 3:16-23). It is improper to conclude from Adam and Eve's supralapsarian state that there will be marriage in the life of the world to come.
Reply to Objection 2. This statement of our Lord is interpreted incorrectly, for our Lord is speaking specifically to the indissolubility of marriage in the present life, in response to the questioning of the Pharisees. It does not follow that, because man may not end a valid marriage through divorce, God cannot end a valid marriage through death.
Reply to Objection 3. The line of questioning given by the Sadducees is properly understood in the context of Jewish laws and customs, which allowed at certain times for men to have more than one wife at a time (polygyny), but never allowed for women to have more than one husband (polyandry). With this being understood, the Sadducees are attempting to force the Lord to contradict Jewish law and tradition by stating that in the resurrection there could be a woman who is married to more than one husband. Our Lord's answer is therefore properly understood as speaking to the vocational state of those in the resurrection who were married on earth, and therefore the traditional interpretation holds.
Reply to Objection 4. It is not necessary that Christ expound upon His entire doctrine of marriage for the cited passage to indicate that marriage terminates upon death.
To the point, however, in the Gospel of St. Matthew, and indeed in all of the Gospels, our Lord is only recorded as refusing to answer the direct questions of the Pharisees and the Sadducees once, regarding the issue of His authority, which He later answered during His trial before the Sanhedrin. Thus, this interpretation is not only without precedence in the Gospel, but it would be unfit for our Lord to not answer the question for, being a rabbi, it would be expected of Him to prove His doctrine against the critiques and questions of interlocutors.
Further, Christ's definitive teaching on the indissolubility of marriage was revealed due to the questioning of the Pharisees, and so it is a faulty argument to say that it would be improper for Christ to give conclusive and definite teaching on the state of marriage in the resurrection when asked the question by the Sadducees.
Reply to Objection 5. Tertullian argues here for a "spiritual consortship," (On Monogamy ch. X) and takes for granted that there will be "no restitution of the conjugal relation" (ibid.) in the resurrection. Thus, Tertullian does not argue for a continuation of marriage as such in the resurrection, but rather he argues for a special spiritual bond in the resurrection of those who were married in the present life. Further, Tertullian recognizes that his position is contrary to a commonly held view of the time, and thus begins his argument recognizing that "we are challenged by an appeal to the apostle" (ibid.).
Comments