Why is there no marriage in the next life?
Luke 20:35-36 says that there is no marriage in the next life:
35But those who are considered worthy of taking part in that age and in the resurrection from the dead will neither marry nor be given in marriage, 36and they can no longer die; for they are like the angels. They are God's children, since they are children of the resurrection.
Why is this the case?
Some Roman Catholics argue that there is no marriage in the next life because there is no procreation in the next life, and this is because there is no death in the next life (v. 36). They then infer from this that there would have been no marriage if there had been no procreation, and from this that procreation is the main intended purpose of marriage, on which all other purposes depend, and from this that anyone intending to get married must intend to attempt procreation.
Where, if at all, does this line of reasoning go wrong? If it goes wrong what is the answer to the title question?
(Roman Catholics also infer that every act of sexual intercourse must not be artificially prevented from procreating; in this I think they do go wrong -- it doesn't follow from an institution's having a purpose that every act undertaken in the name of that institution must have the same purpose.)
If you have an answer please post it as a comment.
35But those who are considered worthy of taking part in that age and in the resurrection from the dead will neither marry nor be given in marriage, 36and they can no longer die; for they are like the angels. They are God's children, since they are children of the resurrection.
Why is this the case?
Some Roman Catholics argue that there is no marriage in the next life because there is no procreation in the next life, and this is because there is no death in the next life (v. 36). They then infer from this that there would have been no marriage if there had been no procreation, and from this that procreation is the main intended purpose of marriage, on which all other purposes depend, and from this that anyone intending to get married must intend to attempt procreation.
Where, if at all, does this line of reasoning go wrong? If it goes wrong what is the answer to the title question?
(Roman Catholics also infer that every act of sexual intercourse must not be artificially prevented from procreating; in this I think they do go wrong -- it doesn't follow from an institution's having a purpose that every act undertaken in the name of that institution must have the same purpose.)
If you have an answer please post it as a comment.
posted by Daniel Hill | 5/23/2006 10:33:00 am
5 Comments:
Daniel,
To the RC, I would quote God's reason for making woman: 'And the LORD God said, "It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper comparable to him."' (Gen. 1:18)
Even when a married couple can't procreate due to physical effects the Fall, their marriage still is able to fulfill the primary purpose of companionship.
How does the RC deal with a couple who can't procreate?
Thanks very much for this, Tim.
Rome says that the infertile may still marry since they are still able to benefit from what Rome sees as the *secondary* purpose of marriage, viz. companionship. Further, this secondary purpose depends on there being some marriages with what Rome sees as the primary purpose, procreation.
I agree with you that the fact that Genesis 2 (there was a typo in your post) doesn't mention procreation counts against the RC position, but, then again, many RCs affirm that there was no sex or procreation or marriage before the Fall. (I don't know if this is official RC teaching.)
Finally, Rome does not allow the permanently impotent to marry, because they are incapable of having true sex. Is this consistent with allowing the infertile to marry? It does seem a bit strange.
As I recall, some Eastern Orthodox hold that marriage, as it is a sacrament, is eternal in effect.
I'm not at all sure how they get round Jesus' apparently clear teaching on that...
I think I'd say that there is no marriage in the next life because marriage (and sex) is primarily an act of union.
On Earth, our union with other Christians is incomplete, so we can have a relationship with a deeper degree of union.
In heaven, I don't think that's the case.
All I can say with regards to why there is no marriage in the age to come is that Christ says we shall be like the angels. What the line of argument is beyond that I don't know. Maybe we have to quote the following in this regard:
"The secret things belong to the LORD our God, but those things which are revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law." (Deut. 29:29)
Or maybe I'm an engineer, typing this between tests!
Post a Comment
<< Home