Understanding Matthew's “exception” to divorce and remarriage

 

In Luke 16:18, Jesus explicitly states that divorcing and remarrying constitutes adultery, with no exceptions mentioned. Jesus gives the same condemnation in Matthew 5:32 and 19:9; however, Matthew includes an extra clause: “except for porneia.” Porneia is the Greek word Jesus uses, which is translated differently in various Bible versions. Common translations include “unchastity,” “sexual immorality,” and “fornication.”

Why would Matthew’s audience receive an exception while Luke’s does not? Matthew was writing to Jews, whereas Luke was writing to Greeks. Were Gentiles committing sexual sins while married not given a pass, while Jewish converts were?

Jewish converts were already accustomed to Mosaic Law, which contained numerous situations where a marriage was not considered lawful—in other words, if you contracted such a “marriage,” you were not actually married in the eyes of the Law. A prominent example of this in the Gospels is when King Herod divorced his wife to marry the wife of his brother, Herodias. John the Baptist told Herod this was unlawful, a stance that eventually led to John’s death. Herod was not actually married to Herodias according to divine law, which angered Herodias.

Thus, Matthew gives the “exception for porneia” while not using the actual word for adultery, which is moicheia. Since Matthew uses both terms in the same discourse, it indicates a distinction between them. If you are married and cheat on your spouse, you commit moicheia (adultery), not porneia (fornication). If you are not married and engage in sexual relations, you are committing porneia (fornication), not adultery. Therefore, Matthew is saying that if you are in a marriage that is not valid—meaning you are in a state of ongoing porneia—that invalid union can be dissolved, whereas a true marriage cannot.

Paul also lists both terms together, which is significant because it shows he viewed them as distinct categories. In 1 Corinthians 6:9, Paul lists “the sexually immoral” (pornoi) and “adulterers” (moichoi) as separate items in the same list. This is another clear example of him placing porneia and moicheia side by side, indicating a distinction between the two.

One of the benefits of being Catholic is that we do not have to reinvent the faith based on our own interpretation of biblical texts written in a context completely foreign to us. The Catholic Church was founded by Jesus and has preserved the living tradition of the apostles, both written and spoken, through persecution and hardship since the beginning. There were times when matters were unclear, and the Church had to convene a council, such as in Acts 15, to settle issues. However, we do not reinvent doctrine. If you ask ten non-Catholic pastors this question, each will form his own opinion, ignoring the fact that the Catholic Church addressed this problem over a millennium ago. Without that historic guidance, many will likely conclude that divorce and remarriage are permissible, misunderstanding what Matthew meant by porneia.

Consider the history of King Henry VIII. When his wife did not provide him with an heir, he ended up executing her rather than divorcing her. If committing serious sins are on the table, he could have simply framed her for adultery, thereby gaining grounds for divorce. His other wife also failed to conceive, leading him to break away from The Catholic Church and establish the Anglican Church. This pattern is common in Protestantism. If you disagree with historic teaching on justification, you start your own church (Lutheranism). If you disagree with historic teaching on baptism, you start another (Anabaptism). If you disagree with historic teaching on grace, you start yet another (Calvinism). This division is tragic, especially in light of Jesus’ prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane: “that they may all be one, as you, Father, are in me and I in you” (John 17:21).